On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 2:29 PM Steve Downey via Liaison
<liaison_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> I see that there's yet another proposal for standardization of pragma once on the agenda for C?
> Is there any chance that this gets adopted? Because at scale it doesn't work, and causes both structural and transient problems, and it will be even harder to get people not to use it if it's in the standard.
>
> The include guard replacement form would be OK, but also doesn't fix the common complaints about guards, that it suffers from collision and cut/paste errors.

We had a previous version of the paper, but it was not discussed at a
WG14 meeting due to schedule prioritization. The followup paper N2896
(http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2896.htm) is on the
schedule for the Feb WG14 plenary meeting, and that's when we'll find
out what the WG14 sentiments are. Procedurally, I think this paper
should come to SG22 before it gets adopted because it introduces a new
preprocessor feature and we try not to diverge the preprocessor
unnecessarily.

Note: WG14 *might* discuss this particular paper at tomorrow's
meeting, if we get through the Friday agenda early and the paper
author is available to discuss it.

~Aaron

> _______________________________________________
> Liaison mailing list
> Liaison_at_[hidden]
> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/liaison
> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/liaison/2022/02/0936.php