On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 at 14:13, Marc Mutz <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2020-02-14 14:55, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 at 13:14, Barry Revzin via SG10 > [...] > >> "Improving the Return Value of Erase-Like Algorithms > >> II:Freeerase/eraseif" > >> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2019/p1115r3.pdf > >> This paper suggests no new feature test macro, but affects the return > >> type of some functions introduced by the free erase/erase_if paper, > >> should it bump the __cpp_lib_erase_if macro value? > > > > Hmm, I thought LWG asked for a change to the macro. > > > > I implemented P1115 months ago and bumped our macro to 201900 (i.e. > > not a real value, but greater than the one in the C++20 draft). > > The paper asks to adjust the value of __cpp_lib_erase_if in the first > bullet point in the Wording chapter: > > > In [version.syn], adjust the value of the ”__cpp_lib_erase_if” macro > > to match the date of application of this paper to the IS draft > > I guess that covers it? >
Yes, thanks! I assume Barry did what I did, skip to section 3.1 "Feature test macro" and read that, and assumed there was no change.
-- SG10 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg10
