On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Jonathan Wakely <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 20 July 2016 at 19:22, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Nelson, Clark <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I have incorporated all of the changes approved at the last meeting into >>> the >>> table for C++17. The draft can be found at: >>> >>> http://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21oulu/SG10/sd-6.html >>> >>> Very few of those proposals had their own macro recommendations, but I >>> have >>> taken them into account. And as yet I haven't done anything about >>> filling in >>> the rationale, even for the cases for which I made my own >>> recommendation. So >>> we definitely have work to do. >>> >> >> Some suggestions: >> >> Forward progress guarantees: no macro (these papers really just add >> definitions) >> Inline variables: __cpp_inline_variables >> Guaranteed copy elision: no macro (portable code should avoid or cope >> with copies) >> Expression evaluation order: no macro (portable code should not rely on >> the order) >> Constexpr if: either __cpp_constexpr_if (matching the paper name) or >> __cpp_if_constexpr (matching the syntax) >> Selection statement with init: no macro (portable code can perform a >> simple rewrite to avoid the feature) >> > > All agreed. > > >> Structured bindings: __cpp_structured_bindings >> >> > I know that's the paper name, but it's not a term in the standard. Would > __cpp_decomp_decl or something based on "decomposition declaration" make > more sense? > Sounds like a good idea. (And decomp_decl has the nice property that it still makes sense when we eventually decide that this is a decomposition *declarator*, not a decomposition *declaration*...) > All the variant changes from Oulu should be covered by >> __has_include(<variant>); I don't think we have a need to track them >> separately unless someone chooses to produce a <variant> header that >> doesn't match the contents of any working draft. >> >> > > Agreed. > > > > >> Up until now I have been updating SD-6 on isocpp.org basically around the >>> holidays. But we might want to try to publish an update before the >>> Issaquah >>> meeting, to cover the C++17 CD. >>> >>> I'd like to schedule a telecon to make some progress on this. August 1 >>> and >>> August 15 look like plausible candidates. If anyone has any definite >>> preference for one over the other, please let me know. >>> >>> -- >>> Clark Nelson Chair, PL22.16 (ANSI C++ standard committee) >>> Intel Corporation Chair, SG10 (C++ SG for feature-testing) >>> [email protected] Chair, CPLEX (C SG for parallel language >>> extensions) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Features mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Features mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Features mailing list [email protected] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features
