Skip to content

Conversation

@burblebee
Copy link
Contributor

@burblebee burblebee commented Feb 19, 2025

@burblebee burblebee marked this pull request as ready for review February 19, 2025 08:15
@eisenwave
Copy link
Member

Fixes cplusplus/papers#1549.

@cor3ntin
Copy link
Contributor

It would seem the changes adding index entries are unrelated and should be done in a separate (editorial) PR

@burblebee
Copy link
Contributor Author

burblebee commented Feb 22, 2025

It would seem the changes adding index entries are unrelated and should be done in a separate (editorial) PR

I believe indexes are editorial and discretionary. We add them as we see fit. That said, I did go a bit overboard here; I probably should have just fixed the references added in this paper, but since it's purely editorial (they don't change any wording), I'm hoping it's OK.

burblebee and others added 2 commits March 15, 2025 16:20
…zy ranges

The wording has been reconciled with the earlier changes from
the resolution of issue LWG 4189, which made most of <ranges>
free-standing, noting "Most future additions to this header
should have no problem being freestanding, so that is the
right default."

Consequently, "reserve_hint" and "approximately_sized_range"
are now also free-standing.
@tkoeppe tkoeppe force-pushed the motions-2025-02-lwg-14 branch from bad0493 to 71a9d38 Compare March 15, 2025 16:20
@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit 240e01c into main Mar 15, 2025
2 checks passed
@jensmaurer jensmaurer deleted the motions-2025-02-lwg-14 branch June 21, 2025 10:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

6 participants