Thanks, everyone! So I will proceed as follows:


   - __cpp_lib_format will be bumped, and is to refer only to P2419R2
   ("Clarify handling of encodings in localized formatting of chrono types")
   and P2508R1 ("Expose std::basic-format-string<charT, Args...>").
   - A new macro __cpp_lib_format_ranges will be added to refer to P2286R8
   ("Formatting Ranges") and P2585R1 ("Improve container default formatting"),
   and those papers will NOT be tracked by __cpp_lib_format anymore (as a
   material change to the approved content).

Is that acceptable?

The change will be applied after all the motions.

Thank you!

Thomas

On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 23:42, Casey Carter via Lib <lib_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> Related: P1224R4 flat_set is missing a feature-test macro. Could we add
> __cpp_lib_flat_set for it?
>
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 6:29 PM Casey Carter <Casey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 4:59 PM Victor Zverovich <
>> victor.zverovich_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>> Adding __cpp_lib_format_ranges for P2286 and P2585 sounds like a good
>>> idea.
>>>
>>> P2508 and P2419 are minor (from the implementation perspective) changes
>>> so I think just bumping the __cpp_lib_format macro is fine.
>>>
>>
>> For the record, I'm willing to accept Victor's expert assertion that
>> these are both small enough that there's no reason to support separate
>> implementation and that a single macro bump is good.
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
> Lib mailing list
> Lib_at_[hidden]
> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/lib
> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/lib/2022/07/23266.php
>