Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

P1169 static operator() #1022

Closed
wg21bot opened this issue Apr 25, 2021 · 23 comments · Fixed by cplusplus/draft#5662
Closed

P1169 static operator() #1022

wg21bot opened this issue Apr 25, 2021 · 23 comments · Fixed by cplusplus/draft#5662
Labels
B3 - Addition C++23 CWG expedited-library-evolution-electronic-poll IS LWG medium plenary-approved straw-poll tentatively-ready-for-plenary
Projects
Milestone

Comments

@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Apr 25, 2021

P1169R1 static operator() (Barry Revzin, Casey Carter)

@wg21bot wg21bot added the EWG label Apr 25, 2021
@wg21bot wg21bot added this to the 2021-telecon milestone Apr 25, 2021
@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Jul 22, 2021

@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Aug 2, 2021

Discussed at the 2021-07-29 EWG telecon:

POLL: allow static lambdas to have captures.

SF F N A SA
0 3 4 5 0

Result: no consensus.

POLL: send P1169r1 static operator() to electronic polling, with the aim of forwarding it to Core for C++23 as a priority 2 item (improvement / performance).

SF F N A SA
6 6 1 0 0

Result: consensus.

@jfbastien jfbastien added the EWG-vote-on-me label Aug 2, 2021
@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Aug 23, 2021

P1169R2 static operator() (Barry Revzin, Casey Carter)

@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Oct 26, 2021

P1169R3 static operator() (Barry Revzin, Casey Carter)

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the C++23 label Jan 1, 2022
@jensmaurer jensmaurer modified the milestones: 2021-telecon, 2022-telecon Jan 1, 2022
@jfbastien jfbastien added CWG and removed EWG EWG-vote-on-me labels Feb 27, 2022
@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Feb 27, 2022

2022-02 poll results:

SF F N A SA
16 16 3 1 1
Abstain: 8

Poll outcome: consensus

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added this to Approved for plenary vote in CWG Feb 27, 2022
@jensmaurer jensmaurer moved this from Approved for plenary vote to Ready for review in CWG Feb 27, 2022
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the LWG label Mar 27, 2022
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

@jensmaurer jensmaurer commented Mar 27, 2022

@jwakely , @JeffGarland : heads up, this contains library wording (in addition to CWG wording).

@JeffGarland
Copy link
Member

@JeffGarland JeffGarland commented Apr 8, 2022

@jensmaurer I took a brief look, are we really saying LEWG shouldn't have a review? And we're already out of bounds w.r.t. the design freeze for 23.

@cor3ntin
Copy link
Collaborator

@cor3ntin cor3ntin commented Apr 8, 2022

I can bring this up on the mailing list.
If LWG cannot process this paper, i suggest we remove the library bits. which are not required for the rest of the paper.

We should also ask Barry/lewg whether move_only_function/function_ref need similar changes

@jwakely
Copy link
Member

@jwakely jwakely commented Apr 8, 2022

The library wording won't take long to review. The question is whether LEWG should see it first. The library part seems like a consistency fix, it's not a new library feature, so I don't think design freeze matters here.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

@jensmaurer jensmaurer commented Apr 8, 2022

@JeffGarland , you're right, this hasn't been seen by LEWG yet. Sorry that I missed that fact.

@brycelelbach , here's an EWG-approved C++23 paper that has some library consistency adjustments. Please process ASAP.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the LEWG label Apr 8, 2022
@cor3ntin
Copy link
Collaborator

@cor3ntin cor3ntin commented Apr 8, 2022

@JeffGarland @jensmaurer Looking at is is not an issue. the question though, is whether you want to see an electronic poll or you think "oh yes, we looked at it" is sufficient?

@brycelelbach
Copy link
Collaborator

@brycelelbach brycelelbach commented Apr 8, 2022

@cor3ntin can you start a mailing list review for an expedited electronic poll ASAP so this can get into the recently announced polling period that will start on 2022-04-19. Please make sure to CC me.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

@jensmaurer jensmaurer commented Apr 8, 2022

@cor3ntin , the details for approving the library parts of this paper are between the chairs of LWG and LEWG, I believe.

@brycelelbach
Copy link
Collaborator

@brycelelbach brycelelbach commented Apr 8, 2022

@jensmaurer @JeffGarland @jwakely we'll do a mailing list review and electronic poll just to confirm. I don't expect any controversy or substantial discussion within Library Evolution.

@brycelelbach brycelelbach added IS B3 - Addition large labels Apr 8, 2022
@brycelelbach
Copy link
Collaborator

@brycelelbach brycelelbach commented Apr 8, 2022

@JeffGarland this seems to be small by LWG standards but not CWG standards so I'm tagging it medium.

@brycelelbach brycelelbach added medium ready-for-library-evolution-mailing-list-review expedited-library-evolution-electronic-poll and removed large labels Apr 8, 2022
@JeffGarland
Copy link
Member

@JeffGarland JeffGarland commented Apr 8, 2022

Thanks all. @cor3ntin I did have a quick peak at the move_only_function section and I didn't see an impact there -- but it was a quick look.

@brycelelbach brycelelbach added ready-for-library-evolution-electronic-poll and removed ready-for-library-evolution-mailing-list-review expedited-library-evolution-electronic-poll labels Apr 8, 2022
@brycelelbach
Copy link
Collaborator

@brycelelbach brycelelbach commented Apr 8, 2022

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

@jensmaurer jensmaurer commented Apr 8, 2022

CWG telecon 2022-04-08: Approved D1169R4 for plenary.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer moved this from Ready for review to Approved for plenary vote in CWG Apr 8, 2022
@brycelelbach brycelelbach added the scheduled-for-library-evolution label Apr 22, 2022
@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Apr 25, 2022

P1169R4 static operator() (Barry Revzin, Casey Carter)

@brycelelbach
Copy link
Collaborator

@brycelelbach brycelelbach commented Jun 19, 2022

2022-05 Library Evolution Electronic Poll Outcomes

POLL: Send [P1169R3] Static operator() to Library Working Group for C++23, classified as an addition ([P0592R4] bucket 3 item).

Strongly Favor Weakly Favor Neutral Weakly Against Strongly Against
13 9 0 0 0

Unanimous consensus in favor.

@brycelelbach brycelelbach added expedited-library-evolution-electronic-poll and removed ready-for-library-evolution-electronic-poll scheduled-for-library-evolution LEWG labels Jun 19, 2022
@jwakely
Copy link
Member

@jwakely jwakely commented Jul 1, 2022

LWG approved the library changes.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the straw-poll label Jul 1, 2022
@JeffGarland
Copy link
Member

@JeffGarland JeffGarland commented Jul 2, 2022

Details from 2022-07-01 meeting:
https://wiki.edg.com/bin/view/Wg21telecons2022/P1169-20220701

poll: Library is happy for P1169 to be move by Core into C++23?

F A N
12 0 0

@JeffGarland
Copy link
Member

@JeffGarland JeffGarland commented Jul 4, 2022

I'm putting tentatively-ready-for-plenary so it drops off the todo list -- even though core will move this paper at plenary.

@JeffGarland JeffGarland added the tentatively-ready-for-plenary label Jul 4, 2022
@cor3ntin cor3ntin added the plenary-approved label Jul 25, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
B3 - Addition C++23 CWG expedited-library-evolution-electronic-poll IS LWG medium plenary-approved straw-poll tentatively-ready-for-plenary
Projects
CWG
Approved for plenary vote
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

7 participants