No problem, Corentin, take care!

I'm very much interested in P3258 (Formatting of charN_t). I'm sorry for not having scheduled it sooner. I've been juggling more than I can handle and have had little time for my SG16 responsibilities recently; it has shown in how late I've been scheduling things. I'll be able to devote more time again once I get a couple of work items over the finish line in the next couple of weeks.

Tom.

On 10/23/24 2:25 PM, Corentin Jabot via SG16 wrote:

fyi I won't be attending tonight. I need to take care of my mental health.

please let me know if p3258 is something you are interested in pursuing or if I should not bother.

cheers


On Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 17:10 Victor Zverovich via SG16 <sg16@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
Fully agree with Tom.

- Victor

On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 8:03 AM Tom Honermann via SG16 <sg16@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
Concerns about std::mbstate_t fall under our purview. I expect LEWG to
look to us for a recommendation of how to handle features that concern it.

Tom.

On 10/23/24 2:11 AM, Jens Maurer via SG16 wrote:
> I think it is off-topic for SG16 to discuss this proposal at all.
> There are no encoding concerns beyond those already answered for
> std::format, and what the components of a std::fpos<T> are and
> which sequence of characters is used to represent it and whether
> you can (hypothetically) parse the representation to recover a
> std::fpos<T> are all good questions --- that belong to LEWG, not SG16.
>
> And a data point: The convertibility requirement for std::fpos to
> std::streamoff (C++98) predates the introduction of explicit conversion
> operations (C++11), thus the only way to reasonably satisfy the explicit
> conversion requirement was for implementations to provide an implicit
> conversion.
>
> Jens
>
>
> On 23/10/2024 02.06, 梁家铭 via SG16 wrote:
>> Hi Corentin,
>>
>> The first version of draft (D3374R0) is to format the `fpos` as an integer directly, which can be confirmed by Victor. The reason why I finally add the state type is that Tom reminds me that it's not proper to neglect such a basic component by default and I think that really makes sense. This also makes me reflect that it's possibly not robust for stream to only output the integer, and that's why `.offset` is not thought as the solution. There is no difference for me to cast explicitly or call `.offset`.
>>
>> In today's talk, I'd like to share something about:
>> + briefly cover what mbstate_t should do, as you may be already familiar with;
>> + why C++ programmers generally think it's enough to use the integer, as a result of illusion from the implementations of streams that do text encoding;
>> + we could provide such facility in the standard library for those programmers who concern the state, as long as we think mbstate_t is not a deprecated feature.
>>
>> For the formatting specification, there could be some better representations if `(pos, mbstate)` is not considered as a good one or even not the default one, and I'd like to discuss with you :). I know that mbstate_t couldn't be expected to be formatted in any meaning way, but it's enough to make it recoverable by the implementation. For me doing a round-trip is possibly the most thing we could do in the standard.
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback,
>> Liang Jiaming
>>
>>
--
SG16 mailing list
SG16@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16
--
SG16 mailing list
SG16@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16