C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [wg14/wg21 liaison] LWG issues to be moved in Issaquah for C++23

From: Jonathan Wakely <cxx_at_[hidden]>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2023 21:34:33 +0000
On Thu, 9 Feb 2023 at 21:06, Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Hi,
> I think the issue for the macros is "nice to have", but probably not so
> important. Nobody uses them anyhow.

Totally agreed - I expect no users to notice or care about that. It's just
that there are usually (very valid) objections if we try to remove things
from C++ without a deprecation period. The sooner we start the clock
ticking, the sooner we can remove them.

> The point on the intmax types is much more, because otherwise we could
> lose header compatibility for integer types for the next three years. So I
> would be strongly in favor of that one.

Glad to hear it :-)
Thanks to everybody in WG14 who helped to remove the intmax_t roadblock,
I'm really happy with the outcome.

> Jens
> --
> Jens Gustedt - INRIA & ICube, Strasbourg, France

Received on 2023-02-09 21:34:47