On Wed, Nov 17, 2021, 20:02 Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 17/11/2021 19.34, Corentin Jabot via SG16 wrote:
> > Can you clarify which note and why do you think it needs to be retained?
>
> The case "multicharacter literal" is retained. We're talking
> about this note:
>
>
> [ Note: The associated character encoding for ordinary and
> wide character literals determines
> encodability, but does not determine the value of non-encodable ordinary
> or wide character
> literals or ordinary or wide multicharacter literals. The examples in
> [lex.ccon.literal]
> for non-encodable ordinary and
> wide character literals assume that the specified character lacks
> representation in the execution character set or
> execution wide-character set, respectively,
> or that encoding it would require more than one code unit. — end note ]
>
>
> You can strip everything about non-encodable from that note, but the
> case "multicharacter literal" should remain, says Tom.
>

Because elements of multicharacters are restricted to those which can be
encoded, talking of those which cannot be isn't necessary. (Similarly,
there is normative wording stating their value is implementation-defined)


> > Also, you missed an R2 following Hubert and Jens feedback
> https://isocpp.org/files/papers/D1854R2.pdf <
> https://isocpp.org/files/papers/D1854R2.pdf>
>
> Indeed. The invitation for later refers to R1, sadly.
>
> Jens
>
>