[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D92725: [libc++] [LWG2993] reference_wrapper<T> conversion from U&&

[Mark de Wever via Phabricator via libcxx-commits]

Mordante added inline comments.


================
Comment at: libcxx/docs/Cxx2aStatusIssuesStatus.csv:38
 "`2988 <https://wg21.link/LWG2988>`__","Clause 32 cleanup missed one typename","Albuquerque","",""
-"`2993 <https://wg21.link/LWG2993>`__","reference_wrapper<T> conversion from T&&","Albuquerque","",""
+"`2993 <https://wg21.link/LWG2993>`__","reference_wrapper<T> conversion from T&&","Albuquerque","|Complete|",""
 "`2998 <https://wg21.link/LWG2998>`__","Requirements on function objects passed to {``forward_``,}list-specific algorithms","Albuquerque","|Nothing To Do|",""
----------------
Quuxplusone wrote:
> Mordante wrote:
> > Can you add the version number in the last column?
> > 
> A priori I'm not sure what the convention is here.
> 
> - I've seen people adding "Clang 12.0" in some other files
> - but //this// file uses just `""` consistently, e.g. on lines 43 and 44
> - as a code-hygiene thing, clearly the best thing to do is have the person who cuts the 12.0 release update all the empty strings to "12.0" in one single commit (or to "12" if that's the convention, or to "2020.17" if we move to a different numbering scheme, etc.) — this avoids forcing individual contributors to guess at the next release number before it's announced
> 
> So I'll happily and quickly do whatever, but I'd like @ldionne to tell me.
The column for the issues has been added last Friday. The papers had this column for a longer time (guess from day one) so I think we should use the same convention for the issues and papers:

"`2993 <https://wg21.link/LWG2993>`__","reference_wrapper<T> conversion from T&&","Albuquerque","|Complete|","12.0"

I agree the other empty columns aren't great and maybe we should all put a version number there.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D92725/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D92725