All, as SG9 chair I just want to remind everybody that the feature is
*tiny*. The specification is longer than the implementation. Please
consider whether it is really worth it to spend this much energy on
discussing it or whether we should just focus on adding useful things.

On 6/22/26 15:13, Eddie Nolan via SG16 wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback, everybody, I appreciate the contribution to the
> discussion around my paper.
>
> There's a lot to respond to in this thread by now; to make sure that my
> response isn't overly long for an email, and that it's discoverable
> outside the reflector, I plan to explain my thinking through the paper
> system, via a new revision of P4030, and/or a new rebuttal paper to
> P4279. I'll update this reflector thread with links once I've had time
> to collect and write up my thoughts properly.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eddie
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 8:52 AM Jan Schultke via SG9
> <sg9_at_[hidden] <mailto:sg9_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
>
> It sounds quite non-academic to me to apply an encoding-correcting
> view on a memory-mapped range and therefore apply the endian
> correction
> only to the parts of the range I actually end up traversing.
>
>
> I was under the impression that people typically use memory mapping
> to map e.g. a file onto a buffer of bytes, in which case being able
> to traverse a byte array with reversed endianness would provide more
> utility than just the quasi-transform-view that wraps byteswap.
> --
> SG9 mailing list
> SG9_at_[hidden] <mailto:SG9_at_[hidden]>
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg9 <https://
> lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg9>
>
>