> > Should we go ahead and do that? If not, is the reason that we think
> there were no shipped implementations of the originally-defined
> interfaces for "any" and "optional"?
>
> There definitely were shipping implementations. I think we should
> update the __cp_lib_any and __cpp_lib_optional macros to reflect the
> changed APIs.

OK. For "any" that's perfectly straightforward.

But for "optional", a macro value of 201606 would mean that *both* P0032 and P0307 ("Making Optional Greater Equal Again") have been implemented, and there's no way to indicate that only one or the other has been implemented.

Hopefully that would not be a problem.

Clark