On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:57 PM Peter Brett via SG16 <sg16@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:

Hi Tom,

 

Having reviewed the paper, I’m struggling to understand how most of those concerns are pertinent to discussing P2178R1 proposal 1.

This is possibly about being clear in terms of proactively dealing with assumptions that non-committee members may have when they hear the "UTF-8" source is "completely okay" for C++. Tom's questions would point out all sorts of caveats. For example, the compiler might say that UTF-8 source is supported with a flag that causes all file processing for that invocation to need UTF-8 source. This is going to cause problems for header inclusion.

There's a motivation in terms of user benefit for requiring support to consume UTF-8 encoded source. These questions are pertinent to ensuring that the benefits are actually realized.
 

 

I’m not adverse to talking about them, because they are important and need to be addressed at some point, but it feels like giving them the attention that they deserve would not leave time for discussing P2194R0.

 

Please could we consider scheduling a discussion of these points for another meeting when your draft paper is ready to discuss in detail?

 

Many thanks,

 

                     Peter

 

From: SG16 <sg16-bounces@lists.isocpp.org> On Behalf Of Tom Honermann via SG16
Sent: 08 September 2020 16:19
To: SG16 <sg16@lists.isocpp.org>
Cc: Tom Honermann <tom@honermann.net>
Subject: [SG16] Reminder: SG16 telecon tomorrow, Wednesday, 2020-09-09

 

EXTERNAL MAIL

This is your friendly reminder that an SG16 telecon will be held tomorrow, Wednesday September 9th, at 19:30 UTC (timezone conversion).

This meeting will be conducted via Zoom.  To attend, visit https://iso.zoom.us/j/8414530059 at the start of the meeting.  Please contact me privately if necessary for the meeting password.

The agenda is:

    • Discuss proposal 1: Mandating support for UTF-8 encoded source files in phase 1

For the UTF-8 discussion, please take some time ahead of the meeting to consider the following concerns:

  • Migration strategies for non-UTF-8 projects to transition to UTF-8, possibly incrementally.
  • Migration strategies for implementors to transition system headers to UTF-8, possibly incrementally.
  • Support for differently encoded source files within a single translation unit.
  • Support for differently encoded primary source file within a single project.
  • Error handling for ill-formed UTF-8 sequences in each of:
    • Comments
    • String literals
    • Elsewhere.
  • Handling of BOMs.
  • Whether an in-source encoding annotation is needed and what form is should take:
    • A magic comment (like Python)
    • A pragma directive (like xlC)

A very rough draft of a paper discussing these concerns is available at https://rawgit.com/tahonermann/sg16/master/papers/dyyyyr0-utf-8-source-files.html.  We will *not* discuss this paper at this meeting, but the Existing Practice section may be informative (please ignore the rest of the draft for now).

No decisions will be made at this meeting, but direction polls are expected.

Tom.

--
SG16 mailing list
SG16@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16