FYI: Serendipitously, this morning someone posted a Clang patch
specifically to bring Clang's behavior into conformance with the current
wording (no non-deducible parameters after a pack). If the patch is
accepted, GCC will become the last odd one out.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D138210
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/48182

–Arthur


On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 7:03 AM Anoop Rana via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I noticed a typo in my last version where I typed {int} instead of {true}
> for Proposed-U for the call `f<int, int, true>();`. This has been corrected
> in this version. Since this is a trivial change I've named the document the
> same as previous(DnnnnR0.pdf).
>
>
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 04:12, Edward Catmur <ecatmur_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 13:48, Anoop Rana via Std-Proposals <
>> std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>> Attached is the proposal that aims to make the following program
>>> well-formed:
>>>
>>> ```
>>>
>>> //----------------------vvvv--------------------->note U Is a nontype template parameter packtemplate<typename... T, bool... U> void f(){
>>> }int main(){
>>> f<int, double, true, false>(); //ill-formed as per current wording}
>>>
>>> ```
>>>
>>
>> I don't see mention of P1985 in your proposal. ISTM that's in the same
>> space and should be referenced.
>>
>> The complete proposal with all the necessary details is attached as a pdf
>>> at the end of this email.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Anoop Rana
>>> --
>>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>>>
>> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>