I now officially can't tell when Victor will like a <format> addition or not.

Allowing locale-dependent printing of pointers in order to get a more
readable representation seems a hack to me. If the user goal is a
more readable pointer representation, we should be providing a direct
way to obtain it, not something that abuses the localization mechanism
to achieve it indirectly.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lib-Ext <lib-ext-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Victor
> Zverovich via Lib-Ext
>
> +1
>
> (Localized formatting of pointers is slightly unorthodox but I see the value for
> readability.)
>
> Thanks, Mark, for writing this paper.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Victor
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:41 PM Inbal Levi via Lib-Ext <lib-
> ext_at_[hidden] <mailto:lib-ext_at_[hidden]> > wrote:
>
>
> Hello LEWG (CCing SG16),
> With the design phase of C++23 behind us, we will continue to process
> issues and minor changes targeting C++23. The majority of them will target
> electronic poll directly (as is the following paper)
>
>
> P2510R0 <https://wg21.link/P2510R0> : Formatting pointers
>
> By: Mark de Wever
>
> ***
>
> From the Abstract:
> The number of formatting options for pointer types is limited when
> compared to integer types. Since the formatting options are already
> implemented for integer types, some of these restrictions seem unnecessary
> and inconsistent. This paper aims to make formatting pointer types more
> useful, reducing the need for users to write their own formatters or casting a
> pointer type to an integer type.
>
>
>
> Some meta data:
>
> * The paper mentions two issues:
>
> * LWG3612 <https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3612>
> (voted into WD in latest plenary P2531R0
> <https://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21virtual2022-02/StrawPolls/p2531r0.html> )
>
> * LWG3644 <https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3644>
> (LWG's priority 2 - important bug)
>
>
> * The paper contains a Tony-table. (Section 2)
> * The paper contains wording, as well as updates
> `__cpp_lib_format`. (Section 4)
> * Please vote with +1 if you support passing the paper to electronic
> poll.
> (assuming remarks which comes up in the thread will be
> addressed / implemented)
>
> ***
>
>
> Weekly reviews improve the readability of the standard!
> By asking questions and sending remarks you indicate to the authors
> which parts of the proposal are not clear, and by doing so, reduce the chances
> of ambiguity in the final draft of the standard.
>
> Thank you for your time,
> Inbal Levi
> _______________________________________________
> Lib-Ext mailing list
> Lib-Ext_at_[hidden] <mailto:Lib-Ext_at_[hidden]>
> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/lib-ext
> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/lib-ext/2022/02/22483.php
>