I am just wondering what legwork I still have to do for C++.

With C, it seems my work is done, and I think with the reasoning given
today at WG14, implementors could even make it a bug fix for previous
language standards without much hassle (actually conforming to the
pre-existing specification in the case of no NDEBUG).

However, I am lost about what I have to do to get it into some future or
even previous C++ standard (as a bug fix)?

I have seen so many things falling between the cracks that I am honestly
curious and careful.

Regards
Peter.


Ville Voutilainen wrote on 17.02.22 20:51:
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 21:40, Niall Douglas via Lib-Ext
> <lib-ext_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 17/02/2022 19:12, Peter Sommerlad (C++) via Lib-Ext wrote:
>>> OK, can we put the paper in the C++26 track in the hope someone will
>>> write a paper to make C++26 based on C23?
>>
>> You could raise it as a defect against the 23 IS under the same basis as
>> WG14's choice?
>>
>> I'm pretty sure implementers would prefer that both C and C++'s assert()
>> are the same, anyway.
>
> Well, technically, mimic the way C specifies it - they specify it
> as-if it's a function. Then the weasel-wording
> about NDEBUG explains how it behaves in different modes, and the
> practical implementation is as in your paper,
> Peter.
>

-- 
Peter Sommerlad
Better Software: Consulting, Training, Reviews
Modern, Safe & Agile C++
peter.cpp_at_[hidden]
+41 79 432 23 32