I will not be able to attend (I have some training to do at a game
development company at the same time), BUT I will have drafts from the
first two «offsprings» on P2966 to offer.

Since I will not be able to present them, I will give them P numbers and
make them available as R0 to SG14 people sometime this week (probably
during the week-end; they are written but I want to give them a second
reading before publication). Please feel free to provide any feedback that
comes to mind with respect to either / both of them. The plan is to make
them part of the Feb. mailing in order to start discussions in Tokyo next
month, and if there's feedback that leads to adjustments in either paper I
will publish R1 versions based on that.

To be continued...

Le mer. 7 févr. 2024 à 11:25, Michael Wong via SG14 <sg14_at_[hidden]>
a écrit :

> Thank you, as the next call is next week Feb 14, and it will be focused on
> Embedded. I would like to add all these to the agenda. Cheers.
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 4:46 PM Ben Craig via SG14 <sg14_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>> Treating constexpr functions and containers as consteval on freestanding
>> is on my roadmap, but I haven't started doing any of the prototyping or
>> testing necessary to write a paper.
>>
>> https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p2268r0.html#constexpr_to_consteval
>>
>> I haven't been paying close attention to reflection, so I wasn't aware
>> that it was std::vector based. Maybe that ends up accelerating the need
>> for someone to look into constexpr as consteval.
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 12:03 PM Patrice Roy via SG14 <
>> sg14_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>> If we rely on vector but in a consteval context, I don't think there's
>>> an issue (I wonder if that subtlety is discussed when examining what goes
>>> in freestanding; I don't remember, personally) since it gets rid of the
>>> costs for memory allocation as well as those for exception handling. It
>>> would be cool if freestanding distinguished runtime and consteval contexts
>>> for these tools. Unless there are costs I'm missing here (that's
>>> possible)...
>>>
>>> Le ven. 2 févr. 2024 à 18:58, Paul M. Bendixen via SG14 <
>>> sg14_at_[hidden]> a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hello all
>>>>
>>>> Just wanted to mention something that might be interesting for the
>>>> February meeting.
>>>>
>>>> I recently saw a comment on the current state of reflection that seems
>>>> to be moving again ( https://wg21.link/p2996 ).
>>>> The worry was that the interface seems to rely on std::vector, and
>>>> where it relates to strings, it uses std::string_view,
>>>> maybe a std::span or even std::array could be used instead?
>>>> Is this (and other parts of the reflection proposal) something we
>>>> should consider during the feb meeting?
>>>>
>>>> Michael also mentioned it might be interesting to get Ben Craig on to
>>>> talk about what's going on in freestanding?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Paul M. Bendixen
>>>>
>>>> • − − •/• −/• • −/• − • •/− • • •/•/− •/− • •/• •/− • • −/•/− •/• − −
>>>> •− •/− − •/− −/• −/• •/• − • •/• − • − • −/− • − •/− − −/− −//
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SG14 mailing list
>>>> SG14_at_[hidden]
>>>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg14
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SG14 mailing list
>>> SG14_at_[hidden]
>>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg14
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SG14 mailing list
>> SG14_at_[hidden]
>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg14
>>
> _______________________________________________
> SG14 mailing list
> SG14_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg14
>