@tstellar What about the feature with ‘partial’ status? Wouldn’t it make sense to also track those? As an end user, I find it hard to deduce if this means: it works, except for some edge cases OR we only implemented the parser part.
I think it would make sense to track those as issue, but I’m not sure about attaching them to the milestone. Can a C++20 implementation be complete even if those aren’t implemented?
I’m not sure exactly how to get this information in a reliable way. Is there some term other than “Clang ToT” that might make more sense?
Yes, I think we should add issues for the ‘partial’ status too. I skipped these, because I didn’t feel like I had the expertise to figure out what was implemented and what wasn’t. If anyone wants to add issues for these, go for it.
How about we just add ‘partially implemented: status unknown’?
Those working on it can complete it?
The hard part is most likely to know who is working on it.
Though if we can’t find those or reach them, it might be safe to assume they ain’t working on it any more, not?
Looks great! Should we do the same thing for C++23?
Also, what should we do about “Declarations and where to find them” https://wg21.link/p1787r6 ?
I know it change/fixes a few things, but I have no idea what exactly.
And the various C versions as well?
Often no one is working on partial things at all. I did try to add more info on the status page a while back but a ticket would be better as it could have more detailed info
I’ve created bugs for the partially implemented features, where I either use:
- partially implemented: status unknown
- partially implemented: [reason on status page]
As I’m not an active contributor to LLVM (and mainly just log bugs), I don’t have the ability to add labels/milestones to it.
Starting at issue 54293 and ending on/including issue 54305.