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

P1701 Inline Namespaces: Fragility Bites #470

Open
wg21bot opened this issue Jun 23, 2019 · 7 comments
Open

P1701 Inline Namespaces: Fragility Bites #470

wg21bot opened this issue Jun 23, 2019 · 7 comments

Comments

@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Jun 23, 2019

P1701R0 Inline Namespaces: Fragility Bites (Nathan Sidwell)

@wg21bot wg21bot added this to the 2019-07 milestone Jun 23, 2019
@wg21bot wg21bot added the EWG label Jun 23, 2019
@villevoutilainen villevoutilainen added this to Wednesday in EWGCologne2019 Jul 3, 2019
@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed this from the 2019-07 milestone Aug 23, 2019
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

@jensmaurer jensmaurer commented Aug 23, 2019

@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Oct 24, 2019

I talked to Nathan in person, this needs revision.

@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Sep 23, 2020

P1701R1 Inline Namespaces: Fragility Bites (Nathan Sidwell)

@wg21bot wg21bot added this to the 2020-telecon milestone Sep 23, 2020
@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Oct 14, 2020

This was discussed in today's EWG telecon.
My intent is to see P1701r1 again, and poll "revert DR2061" is tentatively ready to be sent to Core. No poll taken today, Nathan received feedback, we'll get back to this.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed this from the 2020-telecon milestone Dec 27, 2020
@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wg21bot wg21bot commented May 21, 2021

P1701R2 Inline Namespaces: Fragility Bites (Nathan Sidwell)

@wg21bot wg21bot added this to the 2021-telecon milestone May 21, 2021
@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Jun 23, 2021

This was seen in today's EWG telecon.

POLL: The problem exposed in 2.1 PR90291 (which is the same as 2.3 Modules) is one that we wish to address with a language change.

inline namespace A {
 namespace detail { // #1
 void foo() {} // #3
 }
}
namespace detail { // #2
 inline namespace C {
 void bar() {} // #4
 }
}
SF F N A SA
0 2 3 2 0

Result: No consensus for a change.

POLL: The problem exposed in 2.2 Unnamed Namespaces is one that we wish to address with a clarification of the Standard’s intent.

namespace {}
inline namespace bob {
 namespace {}
}
namespace {} // error, ambiguous
SF F N A SA
0 7 1 0 0

Result: Consensus.

POLL: Direct Core to clarify the Standard’s intent in 2.2 Unnamed Namespaces by adopting P1701r2’s 5.2 Option B. Resolve this as a Core issue, apply as a DR.

SF F N A SA
2 6 0 0 0

Result: Consensus.

Process: Nathan to talk to Mike, will open a Core issue with the proposed resolution. No need for EWG electronic polling, but Nathan should email EWG once the Core issue is open.

@jfbastien jfbastien added CWG and removed EWG labels Jun 23, 2021
@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Jun 23, 2021

Moving the paper to Core to track the issue that will be open. Once the issue is open, I believe that the issue can be closed as the paper will see no further progress.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added this to Ready for review in CWG Jul 30, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
CWG
Ready for review
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
3 participants