C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [SG15] [isocpp-ext] Modularization of the standard library andABI stability

From: Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash <brycelelbach_at_[hidden]>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 02:45:03 -0700
I want a scope on that reorganization.

What problems do we want to solve? Possible answers:

- Finer grained access to things, either in addition to or in place of
coarse access (for example being able to just get function, not all of
- More logical access to things (tuple is in <tuple>, so clearly pair must
be in <pair>... oh wait)
- Freestanding concerns (separate function from parts of <functional> that
are complicated to freestandingifyl

On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, 02:39 Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>

> On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 at 11:33, Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash
> <brycelelbach_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > I wrote a paper that in large part was a response to P0581, so yes, I've
> read it a few times.
> >
> > https://wg21.link/P1453
> >
> > It sounded like you were trying to make a point. Can you be clearer
> about what that point was?
> P0581 has some bits of rationale for providing named modules, not just
> transitioned headers.
> Reorganization seems to be one of them.

Received on 2020-03-09 04:48:00