On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 10:25 AM Arthur O'Dwyer via SG10 < [email protected]> wrote:
> At the EWG telecon today, I was convinced that P2266 "Simpler implicit > move" <https://isocpp.org/files/papers/P2266R1.html> needs a feature-test > macro. > > My question is, what should this feature-test macro's name be? I asked > EWG for suggestions and the answer was "not here, go ask SG10." > > I propose > #define __cpp_simpler_implicit_move [whatever] > > where my understanding is that `[whatever]` will end up being set to the > date of the paper's adoption into the working draft. > > Ship it? Or does anyone have relevant thoughts on naming? > I think a name with a comparative ("simpler") will age badly. I'd suggest we either call this __cpp_implicit_move, or perhaps bump the value of __cpp_rvalue_references. > –Arthur > -- > SG10 mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg10 >
-- SG10 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg10
