>
Is it then worth standardising? Anyone can write the 8 lines of "using" statements.
While this is true, I can think of at least two reasons it should be standardized:
- It’s worth standardizing so a user doesn’t have to write the boilerplate in some utils.hpp or common.hpp file in all projects. std::move is similarly trivial to write yourself, etc.
- It’s worth standardizing so that it is standard. What if one project calls it i8 but another calls it s8? Furthermore, code examples online should be able to use these more sensible names without having to add a footnote along the lines of “assume the convention of these 8 usings is followed”
Cheers,
Jeremy
On Wednesday, 2 July 2025 17:15:08 Pacific Daylight Time Radu Ungureanu via
Std-Proposals wrote:
> This feature would be /opt-in/, in it's own namespace (not as global
> identifiers, unless explicitly doing a "using namespace") and would not
> be new keywords into the language.
Is it then worth standardising? Anyone can write the 8 lines of "using"
statements.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
Principal Engineer - Intel Platform & System Engineering
--
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals