C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [SG10] Updating SD-6 before Jacksonville

From: Aaron Ballman <aaron_at_[hidden]>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 16:12:12 -0500
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Nelson, Clark <clark.nelson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Here is a draft of SD-6, updated with decisions from the Kona meeting. But
> naturally, there are lot of places I mark guesses that I have made.
> Unfortunately, because the redlining is relative to the published SD-6, it
> might be less than obvious what is really new -- except that we changed from
> N-numbers to P-numbers at this meeting.
> As always, corrections and contributions are most earnestly welcomed.

I am slightly confused about:

N4266: Attributes for namespaces and enumerators


enum {
#if __cpp_enumerator_attributes
, new_val };

The notion of feature testing macros for C++ attributes was not voted
favorably by EWG in Kona, and what I understand from reading the
discussion (which could be me horribly misunderstanding the feeling in
the room) was that there was insufficient motivation for such a thing.
However, this is a feature testing macro... for an attribute, just
with a different spelling than what SG-10 proposed.

If we need this feature testing macro (which I believe we do), can we
use this as a motivating case for EWG to reconsider as to why
__has_cpp_attribute is valuable?


> --
> 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)
> _______________________________________________
> Features mailing list
> Features_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features

Received on 2015-11-16 22:12:14