Doc No: SC22/WG21/N1458 J16/03-0041 Date: April 25, 2003 Project: JTC1.22.32 Reply to: Robert Klarer IBM Canada, Ltd. firstname.lastname@example.org
Name Country HOD?
---- ------- ----
Steve Adamczyk USA No
Matt Austern USA No
Steve Clamage USA No
Gabriel Dos Reis France No
Francis Glassborow UK No
Lois Goldthwaite UK No
Chris Hill UK No
Seiji Hayashida Japan No
Robert Klarer Canada Yes
Ichiro Koshida Japan Yes
Jan Kristoffersen Denmark Yes
Clark Nelson USA Yes
Tana Plauger USA No
Tom Plum USA No
Georges Schumacher France Yes
Bjarne Stroustrup USA No
Herb Sutter (Convenor)
Detlef Vollmann Switzerland Yes
This item is now done.
T. Plauger asked whether a Record of Response will be made available. Plum recalled that one of the concerns about making Records of Response available was that it would result in excessively large mailings. For this reason, the "Changes and Context" committee document was expected to be an SC22 document only and not a joint SC22/J16 document. However, it has recently been decided that J16 will no longer issue hardcopy mailings, so no reason remains for making this document an SC22 document only.
Action item for Sutter: check to see whether the group needs permission to make this document available to the public on the committee's website.
Plum mentioned that he had asked for a show of hands at the WG14 meeting to see how many people attending the C meeting thought that they were C liaisons to C++. Nine people responded.
Plum reviewed WG14 work on a planned Technical Report to specify extended character types in C. The TR will specify a 16-bit character type named char16_t and a 32-bit character type named char32_t. Literals of type char16_t will be denoted by the prefix 'u', and char32_t literals will be denoted by the prefix 'U'. This proposal will introduce a new header named <uchar.h>, and this header will declare a number of new functions, including mbrtoc16, mbrtoc32, c16rtomb, and c32rtomb.
Plum indicated that work had progressed on the Technical Report concerning the use of C in embedded systems.
Plum also reported that WG14 had discussed the option of handling new work in TRs, rather than planning specifically for new revisions of the standard, and that there was some sense among the group that no new C standard would be necessary in the foreseeable future.
T. Plauger reported that the WG14 meeting had been well attended, and that the C committee has accepted invitations to convene in Sydney, Australia in Spring of 2004 and in Redmond WA in Fall of 2004.
The committee has received a firm invitation from Software Whitesmiths Australia to meet in Sydney, and a tentative invitation from Norway. The C comittee has already accepted an invitation to convene in Sydney during the week of March 29, 2004.
Glassborow expressed a concern about the cost of travel to Australia.
Sutter reported that some early investigation had been conducted, and that travel costs will be comparable to those associated with other meetings.
OOPSLA is being held in Vancouver, BC (a two-hour drive from Redmond).
Dates will be selected in October so that it will be convenient for members to attend both OOPSLA and the WG21/J16 meeting.
There is a new draft of the document that supercedes the one that appears in the pre-meeting mailing. Goldthwaite reported that she would like to forward this document to SC22 for approval as a TR.
Sutter requested that diffs demonstrating changes between current draft and the draft that appeared in the pre-meeting mailing be made available to committee members.
Sutter observed that at this meeting, the commitee may vote things into C++0x, and that the committee needs a document to serve as a basis for this work. Sutter suggested that this base document should be 14882:2003(E).
Goldthwaite recommended the establishment of a group for the discussion of Generic Programming and Metaprogramming in C++. This group would allow Library Working Group members to work better with Core Working Group members to find the best means of expressing the specification and implementation of generic libraries and metaprogramming libraries in C++ (with core language changes, if necessary).
Much discussion followed, and was summarized by Plum: this issue is to be decided by the Evolution Working Group.
Stroustrup and Nelson both observed that the Evolution Working Group was established to permit the sort of cooperation that Goldthwaite desired.
This agenda was approved by unanimous consent.
Meeting adjourned at 19:25.