C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [SG10] Updated SD-6 draft

From: Jonathan Wakely <cxx_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 17:56:34 +0100
The row for __cpp_lib_not_fn says the header is <function> which should be

The row for __cpp_lib_lock_guard_variadic says the header is <thread> but
lock_guard is defined in <mutex>

On 22 July 2016 at 20:06, Nelson, Clark <clark.nelson_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Many thanks to Richard and Jonathan for their recent suggestions.
> I have posted a new draft:
> http://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21oulu/SG10/sd-6.html#recs.cpp17
> It reflects most of the recent discussion. (I am not yet assuming we have
> reached consensus about any/optional.)
> I have also done quite a bit of editorial work.
> One of the most significant changes is that I deleted most of the editorial
> question marks indicating uncertainty about a proposal, calling attention
> for
> review. What I'd like people to do is take a close look at the whole of the
> C++17 content. (The insertion indications are relative to the posted SD-6,
> so everything from Jacksonville and Oulu is considered new.)
> What I have done instead is add an indication for every proposed macro for
> which we don't yet have an example -- which is to say, for which we don't
> yet have a rationale. I'd really like to get more examples -- but I don't
> plan to do all the work of inventing them myself.
> --
> 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 2016-08-03 18:56:56