Hi, I feel that I have to give my 2c here. But I think that the standard
committee regards the whole "include and guards etc"-problem as "solved" by
c++-modules. While the tools still lag behind to properly support it (not
to mention all the tons of libraries not incorporating it), the
modules-system (if I understand it fully) would remove the need for include
guards/prsgma once (under assumption that _all includes_ are replaced with
proper import/export).

// Robin

On Tue, Aug 27, 2024, 21:10 Ville Voutilainen via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 22:02, Arthur O'Dwyer via Std-Proposals
> <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> > FWIW, I'd be very strongly opposed to any attempt to change the
> recommended practice away from the current existing practice, e.g. to a new
> directive `#once`, or `#pragma STD once`, or anything like that. I believe
> you're not proposing any such change; I just hope it'll stay that way. :)
>
> That's intriguing, considering that the whole point of a #pragma is to
> have something that is an implementation-defined facility, and there
> is an implicit
> promise that a standard will never grab a #pragma.
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>