Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2024 16:46:54 +0100
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 at 16:14, Hans via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "This document describes a set of source-level tools to communicate
> potential future ABI breakage from any library (not just the standard
> library) to its users. It does not propose to break ABI, but provides a
> mechanism for doing so in an orderly fashion in future C++ releases."
>
> The full document is located here:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P1mL1J0rXJlRnLYrcquzLVqE3jPd_IC6uQYnMIE68vA/edit?usp=sharing
"There is great reticence to add new standard library classes"
Is there? I'm not sure I want to live in a world where we add a lot *more*
classes to the standard, if what we have now is the result of great
reticence!
The comparison with previous proposals would benefit from references to
those proposals.
The std::stable suggestions looks like https://wg21.link/n4028
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "This document describes a set of source-level tools to communicate
> potential future ABI breakage from any library (not just the standard
> library) to its users. It does not propose to break ABI, but provides a
> mechanism for doing so in an orderly fashion in future C++ releases."
>
> The full document is located here:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P1mL1J0rXJlRnLYrcquzLVqE3jPd_IC6uQYnMIE68vA/edit?usp=sharing
"There is great reticence to add new standard library classes"
Is there? I'm not sure I want to live in a world where we add a lot *more*
classes to the standard, if what we have now is the result of great
reticence!
The comparison with previous proposals would benefit from references to
those proposals.
The std::stable suggestions looks like https://wg21.link/n4028
Received on 2024-07-08 15:48:14