I would obviously like us to get this in soon. Even if the ideas are not formally presented I would like a broader audience to at least scan the names and the rationales at the meeting to see if they are OK. I realize I suggested this late and I'm not doing the work. Thank you, Clark for even thinking about this.
In other news, I checked in the main part of SD-6 feature checking into gcc-5.0. I hope to get the attribute checking in the coming weeks before 5.0 branches. Furthermore, I have strong support from my fellow maintainers to backport this work to gcc-4.9. Ed On 09/30/2014 05:43 PM, W Brown wrote: > I would actually prefer us to incorporate what we can as soon as we can. > IMO, the proposals seem not controversial, so the sooner we can make this > information public, the sooner we all can start using the newly-defined > facilities. > > However, I also firmly believe that it is Clark who should make the final > call, because it is after all his time and effort that is needed to do the > editing, and in a rather short time frame. > > And independent of the present proposals, I'm sure that I speak for each of > SG10's participants in expressing considerable appreciation for his > leadership and editorial acumen: we thank you very much, Clark. > > Best, > > -- WEB > > > On Sep 30, 2014, at 12:52 PM, Nelson, Clark wrote: > >> I have been thinking about Ed's proposals. >> >> The timing is interesting. The end of next week is the pre-meeting mailing, >> in which I had planned to archive the next revision of SD-6 to be published >> on isocpp.org. >> >> Maybe the timing is good, because now we have an opportunity to get this >> stuff into the next revision. Or maybe the timing is not so good, because >> the window is very short. >> >> For myself, I am moderately inclined to go ahead and publish the revisions >> that cover the updated C++14, and do the back-filling for C++11 and older as >> a separate transaction -- hopefully by about the time of the next meeting. >> >> Does anyone have any strong feelings one way or the other? > _______________________________________________ > 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
