Subject: Re: [SG10] Newer draft of SD-6
From: Richard Smith (richard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-03-31 21:26:30
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Nelson, Clark <clark.nelson_at_[hidden]>wrote:
> Here is an update.
> I have edited in Richard's text for __has_cpp_attribute (and added an #else
> to his example, for improved realism/utility), and updated the entry for
> [[deprecated]] to use it.
Thanks, this looks good to me (but your table of contents is now out of
I want to point out that I think this new feature
> should be reviewed by EWG, at the very least, before we make this part of
> the published SD-6.
> I have also tweaked the entry for shared locking. There is an alternative
> for N3659 that uses __has_include, but I have restored the (not very
> macro as it appears in the published SD-6. That's because (A) I feel that
> the question of making a "breaking" change has not yet been discussed
> adequately, and (B) the published recommendation is actually implementable,
> even if it isn't ideal.
> It seems to me that we're on a course that will not enable us to publish a
> revised SD-6 before the Rapperswil meeting.
> If anyone disagrees with my assessment, we could have a teleconference to
> discuss things, probably sometime in May. Otherwise, perhaps we should just
> meet in Rapperswil.
SG10 list run by herb.sutter at gmail.com