On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 at 03:23, Jeremy Rifkin <rifkin.jer_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> I do recognize that standardizing it may be seen as legitimizing it.
> The thing is many already see it as legitimate.

That is an unconvincing reason to fuel the fire.

> The two options are:
> 1. People say it's portable/fine because every compiler supports it,
> but there's no documentation about exactly how it works and no source
> of truth for its semantics. 99.9% of people don't know what its
> potential pitfalls are.
> 2. There's a single source of truth for what it does, everyone can be
> on the same page about where it could break.
>
> I reject the idea that "a sizeable amount of them will not understand
> those clear rules." Even if cppref is too dense, stack overflow posts
> will inevitably be updated with the appropriate advice.

By all means reject that part of what I wrote, I don't mind. You seem
to be missing
the "and their consequences" part, although your option 1 is exactly that.

> In both cases, yes people will use the feature. They already are and
> they are going to continue to.

I guess the best way forward is to send this proposal to WG21. I'll
try to convince Gasper to help me write
a response paper, and then hopefully the various stackoverflow
discussions link to that response paper
once WG21 rejects the proposal.