Skip to content

P2285 R1 Are default function arguments in the immediate context? #976

Description

@wg21bot

P2285R0 Are default function arguments in the immediate context? (Andrzej Krzemieński, Tomasz Kamiński)

Activity

  1. added this to the 2021-telecon milestone on Jan 22, 2021
  2. jfbastien commented on May 26, 2021

    @jfbastien
    Collaborator

    Seen in an EWG telecon on March 11th 2021:

    We want to address the issues brought up, come back with wording, including discussion of DMIs for aggregates and non-aggregates

    SF F N A SA
    7 12 0 0 0

    Expand on “immediate context”’s meaning in the paper.

    SF F N A SA
    2 11 5 2 0
  3. removed this from the 2021-telecon milestone on Nov 12, 2021
  4. erichkeane commented on Nov 6, 2025

    @erichkeane
    Collaborator

    This was discussed in the EWG wednesday AM session in Kona. The following poll was taken:

    Poll: US 54-100 13.10.3.1p8 [temp.deduct.general] Define "immediate context" - we want to pursue a change for C++26

    SF F N A SA
    3 2 4 8 2

    Result: Not Consensus.

  5. erichkeane commented on Nov 7, 2025

    @erichkeane
    Collaborator

    EWG discussed this (US54-100 plus P2285) on Friday AM in Kona. During discussion, 3 of 4 implementers showed significant interest in having time to explore what they would like to do. In the room there was appetite to NOT answer this question (ask CWG to just leave this unspecified), but we intend to revisit this with greater implementer investigation in the UK 2026 meeting.

  6. wg21bot commented on Feb 24, 2026

    @wg21bot
    CollaboratorAuthor

    P2285R1 Are default function arguments in the immediate context? (Andrzej Krzemieński, Tomasz Kamiński)

  7. added this to the 2026-telecon milestone on Feb 24, 2026
  8. changed the title [-]P2285 Are default function arguments in the immediate context?[/-] [+]P2285 R1 Are default function arguments in the immediate context?[/+] on Feb 24, 2026
  9. je4d commented on Mar 24, 2026

    @je4d
    Collaborator

    EWG discussed this along with cplusplus/nbballot#678 in Croydon on Tuesday morning. The following polls were taken:

    As an answer to US 54-100 for CWG, default arguments ARE part of the immediate context

    SF F N A SA
    0 2 12 10 6

    not consensus.


    As an answer to US 54-100 for CWG, default arguments ARE NOT part of the immediate context

    SF F N A SA
    5 12 11 2 1

    consensus.

    Opinion: default member initializers of aggregates should be part of the immediate context. Consensus may be called either for/against.

    SF F N A SA
    1 1 12 10 3

    not consensus.

    Note: the chair initially, mistakenly called 'no consensus', forgetting the 'may be called either for/against' sentence. This SHOULD have been called 'consensus against' at the time, and the has since changed the determination.

  10. jensmaurer commented on Mar 26, 2026

    @jensmaurer
    Member

    Andrzej Krzemieński (author) says this paper is abandoned, in favor of P4149 #2681 .
    .

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions