We have https://isocpp.org/std/standing-documents/sd-6-sg10-feature-test-recommendations#__cpp_range_based_for already so we might as well bump it.
I'm not sure what you would actually do with the information tho - there's not really any benefit to writing the loop two ways, just write it the way that works. On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 2:37 PM Thomas Köppe via Core <[email protected]> wrote: > Does the new range-based `for` behaviour require a feature test macro? > > On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 at 11:11, Joshua Berne (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A) via Core > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I have extracted the wording into a separate file and put it on the core >> wiki: >> >> https://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21kona2022/CoreWorkingGroup/D2644R1_wording.html >> >> We had specified one small fix, which I implemented by changing "the >> object persists until the completion of the statement." into "the object >> persists for the lifetime of the reference initialized by the >> for-range-initializer." I also made changes to p7 to make it apply to >> these temporaries and not only to temporaries bound to references. I >> believe this is all we ended up needing to get these temporaries to live >> for the correct lifetime, and be destroyed at the correct time. >> >> I think we have reviewed the second example, but not the new annex C >> example. I believe that will need at least a little time in core to decide >> if it is good or if it should be trimmed down significantly. I did make >> minor changes to it (because word was very helpful and capitlized the v in >> void for you). >> >> I'm happy to update this file further during/after core review, or Nico >> is welcome to incorporate these changes back into his paper before >> continuing his core review at some point in the future. I know Nico might >> not be available tomorrow, so if we have time and inclination to have this >> make progress tomorrow we will need to update this file separately. After >> that we can pick the final ship vehicle. (Make my file a new paper, have >> Nico incorporate the final version with all fixes, etc.) >> >> >> >> >> From: [email protected] At: 11/11/22 01:54:45 UTC-5:00 >> To: [email protected], [email protected] >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: [isocpp-core] draft new wording for fixing the range-based for >> loop (D2644R1) >> >> Hi, >> >> the draft new wording is attached to the CWG wiki page >> (both pdf and word file because this is my last day being 59 and I will >> probably have no time dealing with it this week): >> >> >> >> https://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21kona2022/CoreWorkingGroup/D2644R1_fix_rangebasedfo >> r_221110.docx >> >> >> >> https://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21kona2022/CoreWorkingGroup/D2644R1_fix_rangebasedfo >> r_221110.pdf >> >> I hope you can handle it without me. >> >> If you tell me what to do, I will be able to do it in the night before >> Saturday your time, I guess, though. >> >> Thanks >> >> Nico >> >> -- >> --- >> Nicolai M. Josuttis >> www.josuttis.de >> +49 (0)531 / 129 88 86 <+49%20531%201298886> >> +49 (0)700 / JOSUTTIS >> >> Books: >> C++: http://cppstd20.com, http://cppstd17.com, http://cppmove.com, >> http://cppstdlib.com, http://tmplbook.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Core mailing list >> [email protected] >> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/core >> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/core/2022/11/13527.php >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Core mailing list >> [email protected] >> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/core >> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/core/2022/11/13528.php >> > _______________________________________________ > Core mailing list > [email protected] > Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/core > Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/core/2022/11/13572.php >
-- SG10 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg10
