SwitchBlade

Personally, i am definitely not a fan of the postfix class/struct/namespace keywords, those arent types after all, and would probably make parsing harder. Also how would you define inheritance if...

This is true, im just thinking of how the syntax around template types, inheritance and concepts going to work, ill make a separate issue to discuss this later.

I do support this idea as well. The proposed `string_literal` type can work the same way that `initializer_list` already works, where it represents a compile-time string literal and nothing else,...

While, to my knowledge, there are no CVEs directly caused by string literals themselves, discouraging the use of raw pointers is a good idea and would force developers to avoid...

Seems that the issue appears when adding multiple template specializations ``` template struct S; template struct S {}; template struct S {}; ``` The template specialization with const-qualified member pointer...

@sean-mcmanus To compile the testing code i used Clang 11.0.1 with `-O3 -std=gnu++17`

I just noticed a type on the example code, updated the original comment

> Are you thinking of some sort of compile time meta-compiler which takes strings to processes them? Sounds like a bad idea to me. This is an implementation-defined trick, but...

You would wrap it in a string_view like container for parsing, parsing pointer strings isn't the most convenient thing to do. As for frequency, it definitely isn't something youll see...

> I guess it's just a matter of how forward you look. The paper I linked is clear about what you said: > > > In the committee, we are...