I'm having some Zoom issues, will be in momentarily...

Tom.

On 2/25/26 2:35 PM, Victor Zverovich via SG16 wrote:
> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>