On 18 October 2013 19:41, Nevin Liber <nevin_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 18 October 2013 11:26, Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>wrote:
>
>>
>> Would anyone like to summarize the EWG issue people desire to raise? Just
>> making the optional int types non-optional? Something further than that
>> as well?
>> Nailing down CHAR_BIT? Anything else?
>>
>
> Well, if we are going to start nailing things down, I'm all for totally
> ordering pointers with respect to operator<.
>
>
I'm all for people finding out how to submit non-paper issues to the EWG
scribe and
then performing the actual submission. I'm much less for people assuming
that the scribe
will automatically create issues from chaotic email discussions. :D