[SG16-Unicode] New P/R for LWG 3328

Billy O'Neal (VC LIBS) bion at microsoft.com
Fri Nov 8 10:00:14 CET 2019


That might be the case, but LWG wanted changes before they were willing to merge it, hence my message.

Billy3

________________________________
From: Peter Brett <pbrett at cadence.com>
Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 8:57:31 AM
To: Billy O'Neal (VC LIBS) <bion at microsoft.com>; Jeff Garland <jeff at crystalclearsoftware.com>; SG16 <unicode at open-std.org>
Subject: RE: New P/R for LWG 3328


Hi all,



I think Jeff’s proposed wording adequately resolves the NB comment.



             Peter



From: unicode-bounces at open-std.org <unicode-bounces at open-std.org> On Behalf Of Billy O'Neal (VC LIBS)
Sent: 08 November 2019 08:56
To: Jeff Garland <jeff at crystalclearsoftware.com>; SG16 <unicode at open-std.org>
Subject: [SG16-Unicode] New P/R for LWG 3328



EXTERNAL MAIL

Hello Jeff and SG16.



In LWG today there were 4 concerns raised:

  1.  Historic => historical
  2.  Missing :: in the u8path reference
  3.  ISO rules forbid ‘should’ in notes.
  4.  The ‘should in new code’ form is somewhat ‘preachy’ and we should say why.



To those ends, how about this:



[Note: The example above is representative of a historical use of filesystem::u8path. Passing a std::u8string to path’s constructor is preferred for an indication of UTF-8 encoding more consistent with path’s handling of other encodings. -- end note.]



Billy3


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.open-std.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20191108/958c2e5e/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Unicode mailing list