I'm getting "waiting for host to start the meeting". Is the zoom link still
the same?

On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 11:15 AM Tom Honermann <tom_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> This is your friendly reminder that this meeting is starting in about 15
> minutes!
>
> Tom.
> On 2/22/26 11:15 PM, Tom Honermann via SG16 wrote:
>
> SG16 will hold a meeting Wednesday, February 25th, at 19:30 UTC (timezone
> conversion
> <https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html?iso=20260225T193000&p1=1440&p2=tz_pst&p3=tz_mst&p4=tz_cst&p5=tz_est&p6=tz_cet>
> ).
>
> The agenda is:
>
> - P3412R3: String interpolation <https://wg21.link/p3412r3>.
> - P3951R0: String Interpolation with Template Strings
> <https://wg21.link/p3951r0>.
>
> SG16 previously reviewed *P3412R1 <https://wg21.link/p3412r1>* during the 2025-02-26
> SG16 meeting
> <https://wiki.isocpp.org/2025_Telecons:SG16Teleconference2025-02-26>.
> Concerns raised then included interaction with the preprocessor, the phases
> of translation, handling of escape sequences, standalone usability, and
> integration with std::format(). Bengt will present a brief overview of
> the proposal and the updates in the new revisions intended to address prior
> SG16 review feedback.
>
> *P3951R0* is a new paper courtesy of Barry that offers an alternative
> perspective on string interpolation that makes different tradeoffs relative
> to P3412R3.
>
> Please try to set aside time to read both of these papers before the
> meeting as there are many details to consider. Spend some time considering
> possible future use cases (from an SG16 perspective) and the ability for
> each design to evolve to satisfy them.
>
> I don't expect discussion on these papers to conclude at this meeting.
> Plan for 30 minutes of presentation and clarifying questions for each
> paper. We'll then proceed with general discussion. Ideally, discussion
> would lead authors towards a unified/merged design or a determination that
> one proposal or the other is objectively better suited to desired and
> anticipated uses. If consensus for a single design fails to emerge, then
> we'll focus on understanding the points of contention with a goal of
> ensuring LEWG is well informed of the relevant tradeoffs.
>
> Tom.
>
>
>
>