Subject: Re: Comment on P1885R0: Naming Text Encodings to Demystify Them
From: Corentin Jabot (corentinjabot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-01-23 16:19:01
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020, 21:57 Jens Maurer via SG16 <sg16_at_[hidden]>
> We talked quite a bit about this paper in the teleconference.
> I have another concern: The core language defines the
> terms "execution character set" and "execution wide-character set"
> in [lex.charset].
> The wording in the paper should use exactly these phrases, with
> an appropriate cross-reference.
> Given these definitions, I'm a bit concern about the name of
> the member function "literal". If it wants to talk about the
> execution character set, it should state so in its name.
While we can bikeshed the particulars, the paper does explain the names
The core wording is not necessarily intuitive for users.
The core wording also assumes (it doesn't really have a choice) that the
execution encoding is a subset of the encoding associated to the current
> SG16 mailing list
SG16 list run by firstname.lastname@example.org