ISOCPP Std Discussion List: by author

To subscribe or unsubscribe to this list (or change your subscription options), see the list information page.

Andrey Semashev

Re: fs::path appenders have inconsistent behavior for UNC paths between OSes (2021-11-05 09:42:36)
Re: fs::path appenders have inconsistent behavior for UNC paths between OSes (2021-11-05 01:58:57)
fs::path appenders have inconsistent behavior for UNC paths between OSes (2021-11-04 22:41:17)

Barry Revzin

Re: Why is this code accepted by all compilers? (2021-11-12 15:02:23)

Doug Cook (WINDOWS)

Re: inout_ptr - inconsistent release() (2021-11-02 20:05:23)

Edward Catmur

Re: fs::path appenders have inconsistent behavior for UNC paths between OSes (2021-11-05 10:00:05)

Giuseppe D'Angelo

HTTPS for open-std.org ? (2021-11-05 11:17:59)
Re: Question regarding [c.math¶11] (2021-11-02 21:39:57)

Hani Deek

Re: Why is this code accepted by all compilers? (2021-11-12 17:34:43)
Why is this code accepted by all compilers? (2021-11-12 03:04:43)

Hans Åberg

Re: :path appenders have inconsistent behavior for UNC paths between OSes (2021-11-05 13:42:43)

Jason McKesson

Re: Access level for defaulted comparison operators (2021-11-24 18:34:50)
Re: Why is this code accepted by all compilers? (2021-11-12 14:52:54)
Re: Can we limit dependencies in a modularized std library (2021-11-11 18:15:54)

JeanHeyd Meneide

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: inout_ptr - inconsistent release() (2021-11-02 17:02:11)

Jens Maurer

Re: Defect of the C Standard within the section "The typedef specifier" (2021-11-13 09:02:59)
Re: Why is this code accepted by all compilers? (2021-11-12 15:07:01)
Re: Why is this code accepted by all compilers? (2021-11-12 08:25:39)
Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-09 17:58:39)
Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-09 17:12:19)

JIMMY HU

std::ranges::for_each with execution policy (2021-11-23 04:13:36)

language.lawyer_at

Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-09 15:04:31)
Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-08 16:11:52)
Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-08 09:39:42)

Lénárd Szolnoki

Re: Access level for defaulted comparison operators (2021-11-24 23:59:45)

Matthew Woehlke

Re: Question regarding [c.math¶11] (2021-11-03 15:28:36)
Question regarding [c.math¶11] (2021-11-02 19:50:30)

Peter Sommerlad (C++)

Can we limit dependencies in a modularized std library (2021-11-11 09:44:00)

Richard Hazlewood

Re: Access level for defaulted comparison operators (2021-11-27 13:46:18)
Access level for defaulted comparison operators (2021-11-24 15:21:16)

Thiago Macieira

Re: fs::path appenders have inconsistent behavior for UNC paths between OSes (2021-11-05 03:58:29)
Re: fs::path appenders have inconsistent behavior for UNC paths between OSes (2021-11-05 01:41:53)

Vladimir Grigoriev

Defect of the C Standard within the section "The typedef specifier" (2021-11-13 08:44:02)

Yongwei Wu

Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-11 12:58:27)
Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-09 17:31:49)
Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-09 15:49:59)
Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-09 14:15:07)
Re: Wording change about "base class type" in aliasing rules (2021-11-08 12:32:54)

Last message date: 2021-11-27 13:46:18