Many thanks to Richard and Jonathan for their recent suggestions. I have posted a new draft:
http://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21oulu/SG10/sd-6.html#recs.cpp17 It reflects most of the recent discussion. (I am not yet assuming we have reached consensus about any/optional.) I have also done quite a bit of editorial work. One of the most significant changes is that I deleted most of the editorial question marks indicating uncertainty about a proposal, calling attention for review. What I'd like people to do is take a close look at the whole of the C++17 content. (The insertion indications are relative to the posted SD-6, so everything from Jacksonville and Oulu is considered new.) What I have done instead is add an indication for every proposed macro for which we don't yet have an example -- which is to say, for which we don't yet have a rationale. I'd really like to get more examples -- but I don't plan to do all the work of inventing them myself. -- Clark Nelson Chair, PL22.16 (ANSI C++ standard committee) Intel Corporation Chair, SG10 (C++ SG for feature-testing) [email protected] Chair, CPLEX (C SG for parallel language extensions) _______________________________________________ Features mailing list [email protected] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features
