On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 at 11:58, Corentin Jabot via SG16
<sg16_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> std::arguments:
>
> I'm still very much opposed to the design from an SG16 perspective (even if I hope the paper ultimately makes progress for C++29)
> This is trying to shove ad-hoc conversions between encodings into an interface that ought to be a bag of bytes. We should have these concerns separated.
> (and we certainly do not want to have support for u8,u16, and u32 in the same interface, let alone path)
>
> The previous poll reflects this, and the paper is not explicit about the motivation for not following guidance.
> In particular, the paper mentions WMain, but this is non-standard - Note that I would not be opposed to something like warguments being conditionally available on these platforms - it certainly would be a more elegant solution to that problem.
>
> But from a standard perspective, I think we ought to assume main() has been called, and that by definition, mains arguments are in the environment encoding (or not text).

I wonder what that actually means. It's massively impractical to
assume that main() has been called, considering all C++ code that runs
as plugins or native libraries
of applications written in something completely different, and has no
main() invoked at all, ever.