I think chandlerc has been OOO, so let's wait and see what he has to say<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 5:33 AM Malcolm Parsons <<a href="mailto:malcolm.parsons@gmail.com">malcolm.parsons@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">malcolm.parsons added a comment.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
The LLVM coding standards don't mention UDL.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
The Google C++ Style Guide says<br class="gmail_msg">
Pro: User-defined literals are a very concise notation for creating objects of user-defined types.<br class="gmail_msg">
Con: User-defined literals allow the creation of new syntactic forms that are unfamiliar even to experienced C++ programmers.<br class="gmail_msg">
Decision: Do not overload operator"", i.e. do not introduce user-defined literals<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2016/p0403r0.html" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2016/p0403r0.html</a> proposes a UDL for std::string_view.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
I think the pros outweigh the cons.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D26332" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">https://reviews.llvm.org/D26332</a><br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
</blockquote></div>