Apologies, especially to Ed, for the long silence.

Here is an updated document. I have added __cpp_noexcept as Ed proposed, and
__cpp_forward_decl_enum, as he appears to have proposed. Ed didn't seem to
make any other positive proposals, but I received an independent suggestion
about explicit conversion operators, so I have added it as well.

I also received a correction from Agustin Berge about the location
(subclause and header) of __cpp_lib_result_of_sfinae (C++14). The previous
location really was just flat-out wrong -- mea culpa. I'm very interested in
knowing whether any implementer actually went to the trouble to implement
the published recommendation in an unrelated header. If not, maybe we can
just treat this as an erratum and move on.

We seem to be getting diminishing returns of feedback from the reflector, so
I think we're approaching a point where we should have a teleconference to
try to get stuff settled.

>From my perspective, our next opportunity to meet would be February 23, but
there's a LWG meeting in Germany that week. Is there anyone who might attend
SG10 who will be attending that instead?

If that day wouldn't be good, then we're probably looking at either March 9
(a Canadian holiday) or 23.

--
Clark Nelson            Chair, PL22.16 (ANSI C++ standard committee)
Intel Corporation       Chair, SG10 (C++ SG for feature-testing)
clark.nelson_at_[hidden]  Chair, CPLEX (C SG for parallel language extensions)