I value portable code highly. If we have known platforms, and a competing
proposal that makes the Windows situation well-formed, it makes this an odd
sell to me. I do not want a specification that requires code to compile on
Unix and fail on Windows, even if it is not currently according to spec and
somehow unportable code.

Blocking multi-character literals, sure. Blocking some single-character
literals as IFDR when they work fine on other platforms, that's just not
right. I don't think I like either variant - making it ill-formed on Unix,
or to allow it on Unix while making it ill-formed on Windows.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 16:16, Corentin Jabot <corentinjabot_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 4:07 PM Peter Bindels <peterbindels_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>> Then I have the inverse problem, now we create code that is conditionally
>> portable, and only ill-formed on Windows. That's horrible.
>>
>
> How is that worse that code that is well-formed everywhere but does the
> wrong thing on windows?
> wchar_t was never portable
>
>
>>
>> On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 15:55, Corentin Jabot <corentinjabot_at_[hidden]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:49 PM Peter Bindels via SG16 <
>>> sg16_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Please explain how that facepalm is now illegal on Unix, where wchar_t
>>>> is 32 bit and it clearly fits.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's only ill-formed if it doesn't fit!
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 15:27, Peter Brett via SG16 <
>>>> sg16_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Corentin and I have authored
>>>>> https://isocpp.org/files/papers/P2362R0.pdf, which will be in the
>>>>> April mailing. This addresses
>>>>> https://github.com/sg16-unicode/sg16/issues/65.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter
>>>>> --
>>>>> SG16 mailing list
>>>>> SG16_at_[hidden]
>>>>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> SG16 mailing list
>>>> SG16_at_[hidden]
>>>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16
>>>>
>>>