On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 9:14 AM Barry Revzin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Two of these are very tightly coupled (P2286 and P2585 both deal with > formatting ranges) and I would expect them to be implemented together > (since otherwise you'd implement P2286 then rewrite a bunch of things). > P2508 is just exposing a type that implementations already use, so is > trivial, and would be valuable to get out faster. I don't know what P2419 > entails since I don't know anything about Unicode. > Apologies for not including titles with the paper numbers. The four proposals in question are: P2419R2 "Clarify handling of encodings in localized formatting of chrono types" P2508R1 "Expose std::basic-format-string<charT, Args...>" P2286R8 "Formatting Ranges" P2585R1 "Improve container default formatting" > It would make sense to me to either: > > - P2286 and P2585 instead use __cpp_lib_format_ranges or something > (even though the former also adds formatting for pair/tuple), or > > I like this / agree there's no need for separate implementation. > > - Put a different value for those two? I mean, they don't HAVE to use > 202207 right? Could we just use 202208 for those and like 202206 for P2508 > (the easy one)? > > Pretty sure P2508 is going to be implemented first :-). > I could see either: * P2508 is 202207 and P2419 is 202208, or * P2508 is 202207 and P2419 gets a new macro (__cpp_lib_format_transcoding?)
-- SG10 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg10
