Set some priorities after reflector polls

Author: jwakely

xml/issue4068.xml

@@ -9,14 +9,29 @@
 </section>
 <submitter>Jonathan Wakely</submitter>
 <date>19 Apr 2024</date>
-<priority>99</priority>
+<priority>3</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p>
 During <paper num="P2300"/> review the suggestion was raised that it might
 be helpful to be able to talk about "an object that models `Concept`"
 instead of "an object whose type models `Concept`" or other more verbose forms.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-14; Reflector poll</note>
+<p>
+Set priority to 3 after reflector poll.
+</p>
+<p>
+"OK with finding a way to shorten this, but not as suggested above.
+Overloading the term "models Concept" for both objects and types would be
+confusing."
+</p>
+<p>
+"Just say 'a <em>`stoppable-source`</em> object',
+or 'a `stoppable_token` object'"
+</p>
+
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue4129.xml

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[res.on.data.races]"/></section>
 <submitter>Jiang An</submitter>
 <date>30 Jul 2024</date>
-<priority>99</priority>
+<priority>3</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p>
@@ -20,6 +20,16 @@ accesses some object via a parameter.
 It might need to be considered whether we should use the more general term "range" instead of "container", 
 which will cover <tt>std::span</tt>, etc.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-14; Reflector poll</note>
+<p>
+Set priority to 3 after reflector poll.
+</p>
+<p>
+"'non-const parameters' needs to be fixed, this isn't about
+top-level const, e.g. <code>std::string&amp;</code> is not a const type."
+</p>
+
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue4250.xml

@@ -1,15 +1,15 @@
 <?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8' standalone='no'?>
 <!DOCTYPE issue SYSTEM "lwg-issue.dtd">
 
-<issue num="4250" status="New">
+<issue num="4250" status="LEWG">
 <title>`swap` overloads for `indirect` and `polymorphic` only found by ADL</title>
 <section>
 <sref ref="[indirect.swap]"/>
 <sref ref="[polymorphic.swap]"/>
 </section>
 <submitter>Jonathan Wakely</submitter>
 <date>01 May 2025</date>
-<priority>99</priority>
+<priority>2</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p>
@@ -18,6 +18,24 @@ are defined as hidden friends, so are only available via ADL.
 This means that calling `std::swap(i1, i2)` will always use the generic
 `std::swap` instead of the custom overload for `std::indirect`.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-14; Reflector poll</note>
+<p>
+Set priority to 2 after reflector poll. Status New &rarr; LEWG.
+</p>
+<p>
+This is a broader issue than just `std::indirect` and `std::polymorphic`,
+it also affects `std::jthread`, `std::mdspan`, `move_only_function`, `copyable_function`, <em>`node-handle`</em>, `inplace_vector`,
+`flat_map` and co., and maybe more.
+</p>
+<p>
+Are we comfortable that defining `swap` as a hidden friend means that
+the generic `std::swap` might be suboptimal,
+and for allocator-aware types might even do something with different effects?
+e.g. if `propagate_on_container_swap` is true but
+`propagate_on_container_move_assignment` is false.
+</p>
+
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue4258.xml

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[allocator.requirements.general]"/></section>
 <submitter>Jiang An</submitter>
 <date>5 May 2025</date>
-<priority>99</priority>
+<priority>4</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p>
@@ -22,6 +22,23 @@ which is possibly not `size_t`, is required to be usable with the allocator.
 Do we want to change these constraints, or change the <i>Cpp17Allocator</i> requirements to 
 require accepting `size_t` values?
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-14; Reflector poll</note>
+<p>
+Set priority to 4 after reflector poll.
+</p>
+<p>
+"The wording technically allows you to write
+<code>allocate(same_as&lt;size_type&gt; auto)</code>
+and reject any other type."
+</p>
+<p>
+"I imagine lots of code relies on `std::size_t` being accepted.
+That's surely a general design issue that's much broader than just the
+<em>Cpp17Allocator</em> requirement,
+and making the requirement stricter seems evolutionary."
+</p>
+
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue4296.xml

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[hash.requirements]"/></section>
 <submitter>Jonathan Wakely</submitter>
 <date>18 Jul 2025</date>
-<priority>99</priority>
+<priority>3</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p>
@@ -44,6 +44,18 @@ a value of type `const H` implies that calling `h(k)` doesn't change `h`.
 Maybe we want to clarify it in terms of equality-preserving
 <sref ref="[concepts.equality]"/>.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-14; Reflector poll</note>
+<p>
+Set priority to 3 after reflector poll.
+</p>
+<p>
+Could say "Note: Thus<ins>, for a particular value `h`,</ins>
+all evaluations of the expression `h(k)` with the same value
+for `k` yield the same result for a given execution of the
+program."
+</p>
+
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue4388.xml

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[cstdarg.syn]"/></section>
 <submitter>Jakub Jelinek</submitter>
 <date>1 Oct 2025</date>
-<priority>99</priority>
+<priority>1</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p>
@@ -28,6 +28,12 @@ It also makes the following undefined:
 <pre><code>#define BAD ); format_disk(
 va_start(ap, BAD);
 </code></pre>
+
+<note>2025-10-14; Reflector poll</note>
+<p>
+Set priority to 1 after reflector poll.
+</p>
+
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>