[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D105103: Add list of LWG papers accepted by WG21 during the June 2021 plenary

[Arthur O'Dwyer via Phabricator via libcxx-commits]

Quuxplusone accepted this revision.
Quuxplusone added inline comments.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.


================
Comment at: libcxx/docs/RangesIssuePaperStatus.csv:26-30
+`P2325R3 <https://wg21.link/P2325R3>`__,Views should not be required to be default constructible ,,
+`P2328R1 <https://wg21.link/P2328R1>`__,join_view should join all views of ranges,,
+`P2210R2 <https://wg21.link/P2210R2>`__,Superior String Splitting,,
+`P2281R1 <https://wg21.link/P2281R1>`__,Clarifying range adaptor objects,,
+`P2367R0 <https://wg21.link/P2367R0>`__,Remove misuses of list-initialization from Clause 24,,
----------------
Mordante wrote:
> Quuxplusone wrote:
> > ldionne wrote:
> > > cjdb wrote:
> > > > Quuxplusone wrote:
> > > > > Were these papers accepted for C++2b in June? If so, then they should //also// be listed in `libcxx/docs/Cxx2bStatusPaperStatus.csv` (as well as here).
> > > > @ldionne asked me to put the constexpr optional paper into Cxx2a, so I think these should follow suit.
> > > Indeed, my understanding is that https://wg21.link/P2231R1 was voted to be applied as a DR to C++20 (with the understanding that it's up to implementers to do what they want).
> > @ldionne: Yeah, but the question is, should these papers be listed on the Cxx2a status page, the Cxx2b status page(, or both)?  I initially thought Cxx2b but then changed my mind to Cxx2a. It sounds as if @Mordante still thinks Cxx2b though?
> Yes I still prefer Cxx2b. LWG-issues are backported to previous standards, these are also listed under Cxx2b.
> I won't object against Cxx2a. I do object to add them to both pages, that's asking for these two pages getting out of sync.
Well, if @ldionne is leaving it up to me (which is probable IMHO but not 100% clear), I'll make the call for Cxx2a please.
Rationale: People might look at the Cxx2a status page to see whether we've implemented all of C++20... and that includes whether we've implemented the DRs that retroactively changed what it means to "implement all of C++20."
@cor3ntin, please make the move from Cxx2b to Cxx2a, and then ship it! (Or, don't make the move and ship it anyway; I won't //seriously// object; but I still think my rationale is good for making the move.)


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D105103/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D105103