PEP 682: Format Specifier for Signed Zero

The new proposal was promised for C++23. I don’t think proposals for that version have started coming in yet.

The authors of P2021 and P1496 have a consensus, the NB comment is withdrawn, a paper will be forwarded for C++23.

I haven’t been successful contacting Alan Talbot, the primary author, by email.

In the end, this is a useful change, and we’ve outlined why in the PEP. It’s reassuring to know that others came to a similar conclusion independently. I can’t guess how the politics of C++ will go. But Python’s change may influence other languages and libraries.


On the contrary, C++23 is effectively feature-complete and accepts no more changes that aren’t already in-flight. Edit: better paper to demonstrate the congestion for C++23, especially on the library side.

As I wrote above, this was not a judgement on the merit of the PEP for Python. :slight_smile:

PS. Victor Zverovich responsed to my question:

@h-vetinari: Out of curiosity, did said consensus paper ever materialize? Still planned? Completely dead?
CC @vitaut

@vitaut: I haven’t heard from anyone interested in this thus no new papers.

Thank you for the C++23 citations and inquiry. So we can assume that a change won’t be in C++ in the foreseeable future.

Thank you, steering council! I’m happy to accept the role, and I’ll follow up properly this weekend.


And the PEP is accepted! Accepting PEP 682 (Format Specifier for Signed Zero)