<div dir="ltr"><div>I'd like to suggest we bump this to 201611 for P0512R0 (GCC uses 201606 for P0091, which has somewhat different semantics). Seem OK?</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 5 October 2016 at 10:18, Richard Smith <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:richard@metafoo.co.uk" target="_blank">richard@metafoo.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">Sounds good to me.</div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 5 Oct 2016 7:54 am, "Jason Merrill" <<a href="mailto:jason@redhat.com" target="_blank">jason@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">We may not need a feature-test macro for the class template<br>
placeholder feature, but we do need one for library vendors to guard<br>
deduction guide declarations with. How about __cpp_deduction_guides?<br>
<br>
Jason<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Features mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Features@isocpp.open-std.org" target="_blank">Features@isocpp.open-std.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.open-std.org/mailma<wbr>n/listinfo/features</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>