On 1/6/24 3:35 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 at 22:29, Steve Downey via SG16
> <sg16_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Neither is it useful to say that, picking some changes from the last few years, that C++{X} must not understand gender modifiers for emoji, must split Chinese glyphs incorrectly, and fail to understand Korean where it overlaps with other Asian languages.
> It's much more useful to say that C++23 can't do those things, and
> C++26 will, than saying that some C++23 implementations might or might
> not
> be able to do those things.

I would prefer that, for interfaces specified in C++23, behavior be
consistent for, e.g., C++23 with Unicode 18 and C++26 with Unicode 18.
We certainly should not restrict implementations of C++23 from using
newer Unicode versions. Observed behavior is a product of both the C++
Standard and the Unicode Standard and should vary accordingly.

Tom.