C++ Logo

SG16

Advanced search

Subject: Re: Agenda for the 2021-07-14 SG16 telecon
From: Tom Honermann (tom_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-07-14 00:44:02


Reminder that we are meeting tomorrow (actually, later today for at
least some of us).  Thank you all for the follow up on the P2295 wording
(I still need to catch up on the messages myself).

Tom.

On 7/10/21 6:12 PM, Tom Honermann via SG16 wrote:
>
> SG16 will hold a telecon on Wednesday, July 14th at 19:30 UTC
> (timezone conversion
> <https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html?iso=20210714T193000&p1=1440&p2=tz_pdt&p3=tz_mdt&p4=tz_cdt&p5=tz_edt&p6=tz_cest>).
>
> The agenda is:
>
> * P2295R4: Support for UTF-8 as a portable source file encoding
> <https://wg21.link/p2295r4>
> o Review updated wording produced through collaboration between
> Corentin, Jens, Hubert, and Peter.
> + https://lists.isocpp.org/sg16/2021/04/2353.php
> <https://lists.isocpp.org/sg16/2021/04/2353.php>
> + https://lists.isocpp.org/sg16/2021/06/2429.php
> <https://lists.isocpp.org/sg16/2021/06/2429.php>
> * P2362R0: Make obfuscating wide character literals ill-formed
> <https://wg21.link/p2362r0>
> * LWG 3565: Handling of encodings in localized formatting of chrono
> types is underspecified <https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3565>
> o Discuss and poll the proposed resolution.
>
> The agenda is a result of discussion between Peter and I; we feel that
> further information is needed to improve consensus for P2093R6
> <https://wg21.link/p2093r6> and no such information has appeared since
> the last telecon. We'll therefore take a break from that paper to
> allow for progress on other papers.
>
> We've had several discussions regarding the wording for P2295. Please
> review the latest wording in P2295R4 <https://wg21.link/p2295r4> and,
> if _objections_ (not just desired tweajs) remain, reply to this email
> to state them ahead of the meeting.  My intention is to poll
> forwarding this paper with the expectation that core will further
> tweak the wording pending EWG acceptance.  The SG16 obligation is to
> ensure that the intent of the paper is clear and that the proposed
> wording reasonably reflects it; I don't want to hold this paper up
> further unless it is felt that the wording misrepresents the intent.
>
> Based on our prior discussions of P2093R6 <https://wg21.link/p2093r6>,
> I'm anticipating considerable discussion will be needed for LWG 3565
> <https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3565>. It has been moved to the
> end of the agenda in hopes that we'll be able to dispense with the
> other papers first and then spend the remaining time on it.
>
> Tom.
>
>



SG16 list run by sg16-owner@lists.isocpp.org