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

P0472 R3 Put std::monostate in <utility> #1993

Open
wg21bot opened this issue Jul 16, 2024 · 8 comments · May be fixed by cplusplus/draft#7700
Open

P0472 R3 Put std::monostate in <utility> #1993

wg21bot opened this issue Jul 16, 2024 · 8 comments · May be fixed by cplusplus/draft#7700
Labels
B3 - addition Bucket 3 as described by P0592: material that is not mentioned in P0592 C++26 Targeted at C++26 IS Ship vehicle: IS LWG Library plenary-approved Papers approved for inclusion in their target vehicle by plenary vote. size - tiny paper size estimate, smaller than small
Milestone

Comments

@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator

wg21bot commented Jul 16, 2024

P0472R1 Put std::monostate in (David Sankel, Andrei Zissu)

@wg21bot wg21bot added the LEWG Library Evolution label Jul 16, 2024
@wg21bot wg21bot added this to the 2024-telecon milestone Jul 16, 2024
@jwakely jwakely changed the title P0472 R1 Put std::monostate in P0472 R1 Put std::monostate in <utility> Jul 17, 2024
@cor3ntin cor3ntin added ready-for-library-evolution-mailing-list-review This paper needs to be discussed on the Library Evolution mailing list size - tiny paper size estimate, smaller than small labels Jul 17, 2024
@cor3ntin
Copy link

cor3ntin commented Aug 31, 2024

Mailing list review (July 30 - August 31 2024)
Forwarded to electronic polling (9 votes) pending a new revision (R2) addressing wording concerns outlined in
https://lists.isocpp.org/lib-ext/2024/07/27600.php, to be reviewed by @inbal2l and @cor3ntin

@cor3ntin cor3ntin added needs-revision Paper needs changes before it can proceed ready-for-library-evolution-electronic-poll This paper needs to undergo a Library Evolution electronic poll and removed ready-for-library-evolution-mailing-list-review This paper needs to be discussed on the Library Evolution mailing list labels Aug 31, 2024
@inbal2l inbal2l added B3 - addition Bucket 3 as described by P0592: material that is not mentioned in P0592 C++26 Targeted at C++26 IS Ship vehicle: IS labels Aug 31, 2024
@cor3ntin cor3ntin added the expedited-library-evolution-electronic-poll Papers that were reviewed on the mailing list and then advanced directly to electronic polling. label Sep 3, 2024
@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

wg21bot commented Sep 21, 2024

P0472R2 Put std::monostate in <utility> (David Sankel, Andrei Zissu)

@wg21bot wg21bot removed the needs-revision Paper needs changes before it can proceed label Sep 21, 2024
@wg21bot wg21bot changed the title P0472 R1 Put std::monostate in <utility> P0472 R2 Put std::monostate in &lt;utility&gt; Sep 21, 2024
@cor3ntin cor3ntin changed the title P0472 R2 Put std::monostate in &lt;utility&gt; P0472 R2 Put std::monostate in <utility> Sep 22, 2024
@inbal2l
Copy link
Collaborator

inbal2l commented Oct 16, 2024

P0472R2 (with wording change reviewed and approved) was added to LEWG 2024 October electronic poll paper (P3467R0)

Update:
P0472R2 was forwarded to LWG for C++26 on LEWG 2024 October electronic poll (P3468R0)

@inbal2l inbal2l added the scheduled-for-library-evolution This paper has been scheduled for one of the groups: LEWG, LEWG Incubator, or a Mailing List review label Oct 16, 2024
@JeffGarland JeffGarland moved this to Tentatively Ready in 2024 Poland LWG Schedule Nov 18, 2024
@bstamour
Copy link
Collaborator

LWG polled this paper in Wroclaw: Poll: put P0472r3 into C++26?

|F|A|N|
|7|0|0|

@bstamour
Copy link
Collaborator

@cor3ntin cor3ntin added plenary-approved Papers approved for inclusion in their target vehicle by plenary vote. LWG Library and removed LEWG Library Evolution scheduled-for-library-evolution This paper has been scheduled for one of the groups: LEWG, LEWG Incubator, or a Mailing List review labels Nov 23, 2024
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

The Project Editor has decided not to apply this paper due to unclear intent (R3 was reviewed in LWG, but R2 was approved by plenary straw poll); see cplusplus/draft#7417.

Removing the "plenary-approved" label (and the LEWG-related labels) for further processing in LWG.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed ready-for-library-evolution-electronic-poll This paper needs to undergo a Library Evolution electronic poll plenary-approved Papers approved for inclusion in their target vehicle by plenary vote. labels Dec 5, 2024
@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the expedited-library-evolution-electronic-poll Papers that were reviewed on the mailing list and then advanced directly to electronic polling. label Dec 5, 2024
@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator Author

wg21bot commented Dec 18, 2024

P0472R3 Put std::monostate in <utility> (David Sankel, Andrei Zissu)

@wg21bot wg21bot modified the milestones: 2024-telecon, 2025-telecon Dec 18, 2024
@wg21bot wg21bot changed the title P0472 R2 Put std::monostate in <utility> P0472 R3 Put std::monostate in &lt;utility&gt; Dec 18, 2024
@jwakely jwakely changed the title P0472 R3 Put std::monostate in &lt;utility&gt; P0472 R3 Put std::monostate in <utility> Dec 18, 2024
@bstamour
Copy link
Collaborator

LWG polled this on Monday in Hagenberg:

Poll: put P0472r3 into C++26?
|F|A|N|
|8|0|0|

@bstamour bstamour moved this to Tentatively Ready in 2025 Hagenberg LWG Schedule Feb 10, 2025
@cor3ntin cor3ntin added the plenary-approved Papers approved for inclusion in their target vehicle by plenary vote. label Feb 15, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
B3 - addition Bucket 3 as described by P0592: material that is not mentioned in P0592 C++26 Targeted at C++26 IS Ship vehicle: IS LWG Library plenary-approved Papers approved for inclusion in their target vehicle by plenary vote. size - tiny paper size estimate, smaller than small
Projects
Status: Tentatively Ready
Status: Tentatively Ready
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants