Mailing-List: contact stdcxx-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C77AC2.395D567E"
Subject: TR1 Development Plan
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:14:01 -0600
Message-ID: 
 <D730FF7CEDDCA64483F9E99D999A158B01098D8C@qxvcexch01.ad.quovadx.com>
Thread-Topic: TR1 Development Plan
Thread-Index: Acd6whXleCe6TOkzSdSbfiW6iMwg1w==
From: "Eric Lemings" <lemings@roguewave.com>
To: <stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C77AC2.395D567E
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello all,
=20
I was wondering if there was a TR1 development plan in place, informal
or otherwise, for TR1 development.  I noticed that there is some
existing TR1 classes but the headers are rather old and they reside in
the transitional std::tr1 namespace.
=20
I was thinking perhaps integrate the TR1 extensions directly into their
eventual namespace and headers and enable or disable the TR1 extensions
with a compile-time macro.  If the _RWSTD_ENABLE_TR1 or some such macro
is defined (initially undefined by default), then the TR1 classes will
be defined.
=20
If anyone has thoughts on the issue, please post them.  Also if there
are docs somewhere that outline the plan for TR1, please point them out.
=20
Thanks,
Eric.
=20

------_=_NextPart_001_01C77AC2.395D567E--