As discussed in the thread about LWG3780, while the direction seems
promising I don't think we should accept the resolution without a more
detailed analysis of the impact of the proposed extensive changes.

Cheers,
Victor

On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 8:55 AM Tom Honermann via SG16 <
sg16_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Please review the following. If you agree with the proposed change and
> have no further information to add, then there is no need to respond. If
> you disagree with the proposed change, have corrections or new information
> to offer, or have comments on the candidate polls, then *please reply by
> Monday, October 31st*. FR 22.14.2.2 [format.string.std]
> <http://eel.is/c++draft/format.string.std> codepoints with width 2
>
> GitHub nbballot issue #409
> <https://github.com/cplusplus/nbballot/issues/409>.
> LWG issue 3780 <https://wg21.link/lwg3780>.
> P2675R0: LWG 3780: The Paper (format's width estimation is too approximate
> and not forward compatible) <https://wg21.link/p2675r0>.
> Comment:
>
> The range of codepoints to be considered of width 2 is not compatible with
> recent and future unicode versions.
> Proposed change:
>
> Please adopt LWG3780 for C++23, backported to C++20
> SG16 chair notes:
>
> Thank you to Corentin for filing LWG issue 3780
> <https://wg21.link/lwg3780> and for authoring P2675
> <https://wg21.link/p2675> in response to requests for a more thorough
> analysis of the consequences of the proposal.
> Candidate polls:
>
> - [FR-XX]: SG16 recommends resolving the comment by adopting P2675R0
> <https://wg21.link/p2675r0>.
> - [FR-XX]: SG16 recommends rejecting the comment but encourages
> consideration of P2675R0 <https://wg21.link/p2675r0> for a future
> standard.
> - [FR-XX]: SG16 recommends rejecting the comment as not a defect.
>
> Tom.
> --
> SG16 mailing list
> SG16_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16
>