On Nov 28, 2012, at 1:14 PM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28 November 2012 09:03, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On 28 November 2012 07:36, Xinliang David Li wrote: >>> What you described is the 'transitional model' right? but I don't see >>> any of those in the C++ standard working paper: >>> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3347.pdf >> >> It's far too early for anything to have been voted into the working >> paper, that doesn't change the fact there's a WG21 study group, >> chaired by Doug, working on modules. See >> http://isocpp.org/std/the-committee > > Oh sorry, I didn't follow the link to realise that's Vandevoorde's > most recent proposal. When you said "working paper" I thought you > meant the current C++ draft, which is what people usually mean by "the > C++ standard working paper". N3347 is just a proposal, it's not part > of the standard and hasn't been approved or agreed on as being "the > current state of modules". There are often competing or alternative > proposals during development of a feature. There is no document (yet) that proposes modules as implemented in Clang. We hope to have one for the Bristol meeting. - Doug
