Do you have an example of code that would benefit from such detection? ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: William M. (Mike) Miller <[email protected]> Date: Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 1:25 PM Subject: Fwd: New issue: auto(x) should have a feature-testing macro To: Barry Revzin <[email protected]> Cc: Zhihao Yuan <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
This suggestion should be decided by SG10 rather than being handled as a core language issue, so I'm forwarding it to the SG10 chair for consideration. Thanks. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New issue: auto(x) should have a feature-testing macro Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 02:48:12 +0000 From: Zhihao Yuan <[email protected]> Reply-To: Zhihao Yuan <[email protected]> To: William M. \(Mike\) Miller <[email protected]> CC: 'Arthur O'Dwyer' <[email protected]> It's hard to detect whether it is legal to do auto(expr) after adopting P0849R8; A feature testing macro would help. There was no __cpp_auto (unlike __cpp_decltype_auto), but the direction of evolving auto(x) is probably not necessarily tied to `auto` in a declaration. Proposed resolution: This wording is relative to N4901. Add an entry to [tab:cpp.predefined.ft] Table 21: Feature-test macros | Macro name | Value | | -------- | ------- || <ins>__cpp_auto_cast</ins> | 202110L | -- Zhihao Yuan, ID lichray The best way to predict the future is to invent it. _______________________________________________
-- SG10 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg10
