Thanks, Hubert! Applied with a little editorial discretion.
Tom.
Hi Tom,
Thanks for scribing!
For the following:
Hubert: For those few who perhaps use$in the preprocessor in C and C++ code, until recently, their code was formally ill-formed.
Hubert: I don't have a lot of sympathy for UB in such strange uses.
I suggest:Hubert: For those few who perhaps rely upon$being standalone non-identifier tokens in the preprocessor in C and C++ code, until recently, their code was formally ill-formed.Hubert: I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who rely on the exact manifestation of UB in such strange uses.[later observation by Hubert]: Due to longstanding divergence between C and C++, the "formally ill-formed" (and corresponding UB) was only true for C++ but not C. As an extended character in [at least certain vintages of] C,$always could have been a standalone preprocessing token or one of the implementation-defined identifier-nondigit characters.
For the following:Hubert: Use of$as a macro name would be impacted.
I suggest:Hubert: [context lost/unclear] Use of$as a macro name would be impacted.
Thanks again,
-- HT
On Sun, Jul 12, 2026 at 8:07 PM Tom Honermann via SG16 <sg16@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
--Minutes have been published for the 2026-07-08 SG16 meeting here. For those that attended, please review and offer corrections.
Tom.
SG16 mailing list
SG16@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16
Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/sg16/2026/07/4831.php