On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Nelson, Clark <clark.nelson@intel.com> wrote:

> All the variant changes from Oulu should be covered by
> __has_include(<variant>); I don't think we have a need to track them
> separately unless someone chooses to produce a <variant> header that
> doesn't match the contents of any working draft.

I note that you don't mention the changes to "any" or "optional". Should I
infer that you think those changes deserve a macro, even though the
previous state appeared in only one WD?

I'd be happy not adding a macro for those either if no-one has shipped the previous version yet. (And if they already have, I think we'd need to discuss this, but it's still probably also appropriate to not add a macro.)