From eb6e331de731fbbbd70e94812f0c8988a4a2b372 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mateusz Pusz Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:27:41 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] style: whitespaces fixed again --- docs/blog/posts/tokyo-2024-report.md | 48 ++++++++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/blog/posts/tokyo-2024-report.md b/docs/blog/posts/tokyo-2024-report.md index e1493c7c3..65deb6237 100644 --- a/docs/blog/posts/tokyo-2024-report.md +++ b/docs/blog/posts/tokyo-2024-report.md @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ --- date: 2024-04-15 authors: -  - mpusz + - mpusz categories: -  - WG21 + - WG21 --- # Report from the Tokyo 2024 ISO C++ Committee meeting @@ -23,13 +23,13 @@ We run a few polls in SG6 as well: !!! question "POLL: The syntax `number * unit` is the right solution for constructing quantities. Not allowing reordering the operands is correct." -  | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | -  |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| -  | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | + | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | + |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| + | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | !!! question "POLL: Not defining any UDLs is the right solution." -  No objection to unanimous consent. + No objection to unanimous consent. The paper was also briefly discussed in SG18 LEWG Incubator, and the initial feedback was also positive. No polls were taken. @@ -50,36 +50,36 @@ Plenty of polls were taken: !!! question "POLL: We should promise more committee time to pursuing std::basic_fixed_string, knowing that our time is scarce and this will leave less time for other work." -  | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | -  |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| -  | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | + |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| + | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | !!! question "POLL: Should the constructor from a string literal be consteval?" -  | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | -  |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| -  | 6 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | + | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | + |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| + | 6 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | !!! question "POLL: Do we want to add .view()?" -  | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | -  |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| -  | 3 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | + | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | + |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| + | 3 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | !!! question "POLL: Do we want the .size member to be an integral_constant (and .empty to be bool_constant)?" -  | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | -  |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| -  | 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | + | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | + |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| + | 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | !!! question "POLL: Should the index operator[] return a reference to const?" -  | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | -  |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| -  | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 0 | + | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | + |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| + | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 0 | !!! question "POLL: Should the constructor from a string literal have a precondition that txt[N] == 0?" -  | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | -  |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| -  | 6 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | + | Strongly in Favor | In favor | Neutral | Against | Strongly Against | + |:-----------------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:----------------:| + | 6 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 |