On 3/10/24 06:35, Tom Honermann wrote:
>
> SG16 will hold a meeting on Wednesday, March 13th, at 19:30 UTC
> (timezone conversion
> <https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html?iso=20240313T193000&p1=1440&p2=tz_pdt&p3=tz_mdt&p4=tz_cdt&p5=tz_edt&p6=tz_cet>).
>
> *For those in North America, please note that daylight savings time
> will have begun, so this telecon will begin one hour later relative to
> the last telecon.*
>
> The agenda follows.
>
> * P3154R0: Deprecating signed character types in iostreams
> <https://wg21.link/p3154r0>.
> * P1729R4: Text Parsing <https://wg21.link/p1729r4>.
>
> P3154R0 seeks to deprecate the basic_istream<char, ...> extraction and
> basic_ostream<char, ...> insertion operators that treat signed char
> and unsigned char as character types. This is motivated by common use
> of these types as integer types (int8_t and uint8_t) and the desire to
> remove surprising behavior that occurs when these types are used with
> iostreams. Deprecation and eventual removal could clear the way for
> eventually replacing the current operators with ones that treat these
> types as integer types for all charT stream types. It is perhaps worth
> noting that this is not the only place in the C++ standard that treats
> these types as character types. Following adoption of P2513 (char8_t
> Compatibility and Portability Fixes) <https://wg21.link/p2513> for
> C++23, an array of unsigned char may be initialized with a UTF-8
> string literal. This leniency was added for compatibility with C where
> char8_t is a type alias of unsigned char.
>
> SG16 has reviewed prior versions of P1729R4 on several occasions:
>
> * 2023-11-11 SG16 review of P1729R3
> <https://github.com/sg16-unicode/sg16-meetings/blob/master/README-2023.md#october-11th-2023>.
> * 2023-09-27 SG16 review of P1729R2
> <https://github.com/sg16-unicode/sg16-meetings/blob/master/README-2023.md#september-27th-2023>.
> * 2019-06-22 SG16 review of P1729R0 in Cologne
> <https://wiki.edg.com/bin/view/Wg21cologne2019/SG16P1729R0>.
>
> This latest revision incorporates changes requested by SG9 and
> elevates ill-formed encoding input from garbage to errors per previous
> SG16 discussion (see section 4.11, Encoding
> <https://wg21.link/p1729r4#encoding>). The last SG16 review included
> discussion of text vs binary input. Elias can clarify, but I believe
> the current proposal focuses on text support and would require custom
> formatters to be written to handle binary input (which is fine). I
> think other previously raised SG16 concerns have been addressed, so
> this review can focus on any new concerns or we can poll to forward
> the paper.
>
To verify, this assessment is accurate.

  - Elias

> Tom.
>