On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 5:11 PM Yuao Ma <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 6:32 PM Tomasz Kaminski <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > There was a paper submitted before Kona: p3862r0 Postpone > basic_string::subview and wait for cstring_view [1], > > that according to github papers status [2] have also NB comment. I was > not able to locale the comment thou. > > So maybe it would be good to have this as patch series for string_view > (that would contain feature test macro) and then string, > > so we can revert later? > > > > > > [1] > https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2025/p3862r0.html# > > [2] https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/2466 > > > > Thanks for the info! Could you elaborate more on how making this a > patch series helps with reverting? My understanding of P3862R0 is that > it proposed two wording options: one to entirely remove the subview > for string and string_view, and the other to remove the default > parameter argument. > Both wording options are changing only basic_string::subview, and not touching subview on string_view at all.
