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

P1938 if consteval #677

Closed
wg21bot opened this issue Oct 15, 2019 · 13 comments
Closed

P1938 if consteval #677

wg21bot opened this issue Oct 15, 2019 · 13 comments

Comments

@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Oct 15, 2019

P1938R0 if consteval (Barry Revzin, Daveed Vandevoorde, Richard Smith)

@wg21bot wg21bot added the EWG label Oct 15, 2019
@wg21bot wg21bot added this to the 2019-11 milestone Oct 15, 2019
@jfbastien jfbastien added this to C++20 in EWGBelfast2019 Oct 15, 2019
@jfbastien jfbastien removed the C++20 label Nov 7, 2019
@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed this from the 2019-11 milestone Dec 11, 2019
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added this to the 2020-02 milestone Dec 11, 2019
@jfbastien jfbastien added this to Unscheduled in EWG Prague Jan 22, 2020
@jfbastien jfbastien moved this from Unscheduled to Thursday in EWG Prague Jan 23, 2020
@jfbastien jfbastien moved this from Thursday to Friday in EWG Prague Feb 12, 2020
@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Feb 14, 2020

See the polls from the Belfast discussion of FR222:
cplusplus/nbballot#219 (comment)

Loading

@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Feb 14, 2020

EWG Prague on Friday morning:

Reviewing R1 of the paper, which wasn’t in the mailing. Can’t poll for tentative ready in this meeting.

We are interested in some solution in the space which this paper tackles, either as proposed in the paper or in some other form.

SF F N A SA
21 19 0 0 0

Consensus.

We want to pursue this paper for C++23.

SF F N A SA
10 6 15 2 0

Given how many neutrals we have here, and none in the first poll, this isn't consensus. People interested in other options should come with new information by next meeting to help increase consensus.

Loading

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed this from the 2020-02 milestone Feb 18, 2020
@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Mar 24, 2020

P1938R1 if consteval (Barry Revzin, Daveed Vandevoorde, Richard Smith, Andrew Sutton)

Loading

@wg21bot wg21bot added this to the 2020-telecon milestone Mar 24, 2020
@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Oct 8, 2020

Discussed in today's EWG telecon. Polls:

if consteval should be parenthesized as if (consteval) ...

SF F N A SA
1 1 3 10 5

if consteval should not require braces, making this valid: if consteval boom(); else bam();

SF F N A SA
1 3 5 7 4

if consteval is tentatively ready to be voted on to forward to Core, after updating the paper as discussed

SF F N A SA
10 11 1 0 0

Loading

@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Oct 27, 2020

P1938R2 if consteval (Barry Revzin, Daveed Vandevoorde, Richard Smith, Andrew Sutton)

Loading

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed this from the 2020-telecon milestone Dec 28, 2020
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added this to the 2021-telecon milestone Dec 28, 2020
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added this to Ready for review in CWG Feb 2, 2021
@jfbastien
Copy link
Collaborator

@jfbastien jfbastien commented Mar 9, 2021

EWG February 2021 polls:

Poll: Forward P1938R2 "if consteval" to Core.

SF F N A SA
20 7 2 0 0

Poll outcome: consensus.

Salient comments:

  • The number of experts who have been confused by is_constant_evaluated suggests that this is a much safer spelling for the utility.
  • Makes metaprogramming more accessible and its code more readable, better composability.
  • Sad that this wasn’t in C++20.

Loading

@jensmaurer jensmaurer moved this from Ready for review to Approved for plenary vote in CWG Mar 22, 2021
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

@jensmaurer jensmaurer commented Mar 22, 2021

CWG 2021-03-22: Approved D1938R3.

Loading

@JeffGarland
Copy link
Member

@JeffGarland JeffGarland commented Mar 26, 2021

LWG review planned for 2021-04-02

Loading

@jwakely
Copy link
Member

@jwakely jwakely commented Mar 26, 2021

LWG review planned for 2021-04-02

Change of plan, 2021-04-09 instead.

Loading

@JeffGarland
Copy link
Member

@JeffGarland JeffGarland commented Apr 9, 2021

Now schedule 2021-04-16

Loading

@JeffGarland
Copy link
Member

@JeffGarland JeffGarland commented Apr 16, 2021

LWG reviewed and adopted library wording.

https://wiki.edg.com/bin/view/Wg21telecons2021/P1938-20210416

Adopt P1938R3 if consteval for c++23
No objection to unanimous consent

Loading

@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Apr 25, 2021

P1938R3 if consteval (Barry Revzin, Daveed Vandevoorde, Richard Smith, Andrew Sutton)

Loading

@tkoeppe tkoeppe closed this Jun 15, 2021
@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed this from Approved for plenary vote in CWG Jun 26, 2021
@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wg21bot wg21bot commented Oct 26, 2021

Adopted 2021-06.

Loading

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
No open projects
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

7 participants