Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 20:46:37 +0200
Hi Everyone,
Thank you for the discussion on P3540r1 (and its upcoming
version, P3540r2). r2 has had the one typo fix changed from "It shall
provide" to "it provides" in the wording, and should be ready for
EWG/Core review: https://isocpp.org/files/papers/P3540R2.html
As pointed out at the end of the discussion, there was some
questions about adding a new feature/constraint related to the
parameters. Some people wanted constraints/ill-formed diagnostics for
if "offset" appeared before "limit", while someone else pointed out
that this should also apply for "if_empty", "suffix", and "prefix"
since they are dependent on whether the resource is considered empty
(which e.g. offset(SIZE_MAX) or limit(0) could provoke).
Those discussion points are captured in a new paper here:
https://isocpp.org/files/papers/P3731R0.html
As stated in the paper, I have no opinion on this and personally
do not think it's necessary. The Committees and Subgroups can decide
how far this goes / what they want out of it. I will also publish a
separate paper for C, too, and keep both in sync as they travel
through the Committees with the various feedback from the groups about
ordering concerns. I also plan to talk to the implementers VIA
e-mail/discourse.
Sincerely,
JeanHeyd
Thank you for the discussion on P3540r1 (and its upcoming
version, P3540r2). r2 has had the one typo fix changed from "It shall
provide" to "it provides" in the wording, and should be ready for
EWG/Core review: https://isocpp.org/files/papers/P3540R2.html
As pointed out at the end of the discussion, there was some
questions about adding a new feature/constraint related to the
parameters. Some people wanted constraints/ill-formed diagnostics for
if "offset" appeared before "limit", while someone else pointed out
that this should also apply for "if_empty", "suffix", and "prefix"
since they are dependent on whether the resource is considered empty
(which e.g. offset(SIZE_MAX) or limit(0) could provoke).
Those discussion points are captured in a new paper here:
https://isocpp.org/files/papers/P3731R0.html
As stated in the paper, I have no opinion on this and personally
do not think it's necessary. The Committees and Subgroups can decide
how far this goes / what they want out of it. I will also publish a
separate paper for C, too, and keep both in sync as they travel
through the Committees with the various feedback from the groups about
ordering concerns. I also plan to talk to the implementers VIA
e-mail/discourse.
Sincerely,
JeanHeyd
Received on 2025-06-05 18:47:02