C++ Logo

STD-PROPOSALS

Advanced search

Subject: Re: [std-proposals] Template qualifiers
From: Phil Bouchard (phil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-10-05 00:43:18


It can't break the standards because you're adding a new syntax, you're
not replacing one or hijacking the template token types.

For the rest maybe I can help but you seem to be more aware of the
latest standards than I am.

Also IMO this is really important in order to keep the standards as
clean and simple as possible.

On 10/5/19 1:37 AM, Brian Bi wrote:
> I'd be willing to write a proposal but it would be a lot of work, so
> I'm curious whether people think this would be something good to have
> in addition to P0847, before I go ahead and write it up.
>
> On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 12:19 AM Phil Bouchard via Std-Proposals
> <std-proposals_at_[hidden]
> <mailto:std-proposals_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
>
> Are we moving forward with the syntax Brian suggested? It seems
> good to me...
>
>
> On 10/4/19 11:31 AM, Phil Bouchard wrote:
>>
>> But Brian came up with a better syntax.
>>
>
> --
>
> *Phil Bouchard*
> Founder
> C.: (819) 328-4743
>
> Fornux Logo <http://www.fornux.com>
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden] <mailto:Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]>
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>
>
>
> --
> /Brian Bi/

-- 
*Phil Bouchard*
Founder
C.: (819) 328-4743
Fornux Logo <http://www.fornux.com>


STD-PROPOSALS list run by herb.sutter at gmail.com

Standard Proposals Archives on Google Groups