mclow.lists added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D49774#1175062, @ldionne wrote:

> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D49774#1174588, @EricWF wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D49774#1174565, @mclow.lists wrote:
> >
> > > I haven't reviewed this closely, but you might want to look at 
> > > http://wg21.link/P0355, where we added a `file_clock` and `file_time` 
> > > types.
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the information. It doesn't look to have too much bearing on 
> > this from a design standpoint. Except to note that it seems to solve
> >  the streaming problem by adding explicit streaming overload for time 
> > points.
>
>
> It doesn't change anything from a design standpoint, but I don't think we can 
> ship something deemed stable without taking P0355 into account. That's 
> because it adds `file_clock` and changes `file_time_type` to use it, which is 
> an ABI break. So if we take `filesystem` out of `experimental` and ship it 
> before we've actually implemented the parts of P0355 that change the ABI, 
> we'll have to take an ABI break in the future. That would suck because this 
> ABI break would be necessary to implement C++20 properly in a fairly major 
> way.


Another problem (that Eric and I discussed last night) is that filesystem is 
part of C++17, and `file_clock` is C++20. So we need a solution for C++17 as 
well.


Repository:
  rCXX libc++

https://reviews.llvm.org/D49774



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to