Subject: Re: [SG16-Unicode] Draft summary of where we are on std::text
From: Steve Downey (sdowney_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-02 22:54:16
Good catch on the questions. I'll fix consistently one way or the other.
Probably adding '?'
I thought you were done with Boost.Text, but didn't want to over promise
Allocators. Well I work for Bloomberg, and can tell you without a doubt
that Lakos will No vote if it doesn't support them. I consider it facing
reality. I also use the pre-standard equivalent of pmr frequently, and find
Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing scoped allocators vanish, but someone
must want them.
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, 23:36 Zach Laine <whatwasthataddress_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 10:28 PM Steve Downey <sdowney_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Study Group 16 std::text Technical Direction
> Thanks so much for doing this, Steve. Two nits: 1) The issues in Areas
> of Discussion are stated as questions, but they currently lack question
> marks. 2) Boost.Text is actually code complete now, but of course will
> probably change during a Boost review.
> One crazy guy shouting into the wilderness point: I'm probably alone, but
> I don't think we need, nor do we want, allocators. (Discuss!) I
> understand if I'm alone in this view.
SG16 list run by herb.sutter at gmail.com