On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Miles Bader <mi...@gnu.org> wrote: > 2012/11/29 Gabriel Dos Reis <g...@integrable-solutions.net>: >> My understanding from attending the last C++ standards committee is >> that we are still way far from having something that gets consensus of >> good enough proposal on modules to coalesce around. We have several >> proposals, each in various states of experimental implementations; >> nothing more. > > Do you have pointers to any other other (currently viable) proposals, > besides the one outlined by N3347 and the slides Chris pointed a link > to? > > Thanks, > > -miles > > p.s. sorry if all of this is common knowledge... ^^; > > -- > Cat is power. Cat is peace.
Lawrence Crowl (in collaboration with Diego I think) has a proposal based on PPH. Lawrence knows best the proposal number. It was already pointed out that David Vandevoorde has a proposal slightly different from Clang's. At the Fall 2012 Portland meeting, people from CERN expressed concerns about Clang's implementation and have been working with Clang people to get their proposed modifications integrated; it is not clear to me whether they have made progress on that or whether they are going to formally put forward a fourth formal proposal. As Doug just indicated, there is going to be another proposal based on Clang's current implementation -- which is different from the document referred to earlier. -- Gaby
