On Nov 16, 2017, at 2:24 PM, Joseph Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > > ISO C17 won't go to ballot until December, meaning publication of the > standard won't be until 2018, leaving ambiguity as to whether people > will end up referring to the standard as C17, as it's currently known > and which corresponds to the __STDC_VERSION__ value, or C18 based on > the publication date.
C++98 was similar. The last draft was in 97, but, the actual ISO standard was 98. I think the ANSI version was done in 97. The name 97 is never, ever used, and c++98 names it pretty well. cplusplus has a 97 date on it. If there was no major release with c17, I would ditch the c17 spelling and just change it to c18 now. :-) I know, kinda sucks, but, until published, it just doesn't exist. This is why we use 0x, and other names that we can safely deprecate for c++. Concerning iso9899:2017, naming an actual document that doesn't exist, strikes me as wrong. I've advise against it.
