We have
https://isocpp.org/std/standing-documents/sd-6-sg10-feature-test-recommendations#__cpp_range_based_for
already so we might as well bump it.

I'm not sure what you would actually do with the information tho - there's
not really any benefit to writing the loop two ways, just write it the way
that works.

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, 2:37 PM Thomas Köppe via Core <core_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> Does the new range-based `for` behaviour require a feature test macro?
>
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 at 11:11, Joshua Berne (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A) via Core
> <core_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> I have extracted the wording into a separate file and put it on the core
>> wiki:
>>
>> https://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21kona2022/CoreWorkingGroup/D2644R1_wording.html
>>
>> We had specified one small fix, which I implemented by changing "the
>> object persists until the completion of the statement." into "the object
>> persists for the lifetime of the reference initialized by the
>> for-range-initializer." I also made changes to p7 to make it apply to
>> these temporaries and not only to temporaries bound to references. I
>> believe this is all we ended up needing to get these temporaries to live
>> for the correct lifetime, and be destroyed at the correct time.
>>
>> I think we have reviewed the second example, but not the new annex C
>> example. I believe that will need at least a little time in core to decide
>> if it is good or if it should be trimmed down significantly. I did make
>> minor changes to it (because word was very helpful and capitlized the v in
>> void for you).
>>
>> I'm happy to update this file further during/after core review, or Nico
>> is welcome to incorporate these changes back into his paper before
>> continuing his core review at some point in the future. I know Nico might
>> not be available tomorrow, so if we have time and inclination to have this
>> make progress tomorrow we will need to update this file separately. After
>> that we can pick the final ship vehicle. (Make my file a new paper, have
>> Nico incorporate the final version with all fixes, etc.)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: core_at_[hidden] At: 11/11/22 01:54:45 UTC-5:00
>> To: core_at_[hidden], Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden]
>> Cc: nico_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: [isocpp-core] draft new wording for fixing the range-based for
>> loop (D2644R1)
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> the draft new wording is attached to the CWG wiki page
>> (both pdf and word file because this is my last day being 59 and I will
>> probably have no time dealing with it this week):
>>
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21kona2022/CoreWorkingGroup/D2644R1_fix_rangebasedfo
>> r_221110.docx
>>
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21kona2022/CoreWorkingGroup/D2644R1_fix_rangebasedfo
>> r_221110.pdf
>>
>> I hope you can handle it without me.
>>
>> If you tell me what to do, I will be able to do it in the night before
>> Saturday your time, I guess, though.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Nico
>>
>> --
>> ---
>> Nicolai M. Josuttis
>> www.josuttis.de
>> +49 (0)531 / 129 88 86 <+49%20531%201298886>
>> +49 (0)700 / JOSUTTIS
>>
>> Books:
>> C++: http://cppstd20.com, http://cppstd17.com, http://cppmove.com,
>> http://cppstdlib.com, http://tmplbook.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Core mailing list
>> Core_at_[hidden]
>> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/core
>> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/core/2022/11/13527.php
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Core mailing list
>> Core_at_[hidden]
>> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/core
>> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/core/2022/11/13528.php
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Core mailing list
> Core_at_[hidden]
> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/core
> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/core/2022/11/13572.php
>