C++ defect reports: how to behave

[Giovanni Bajo]

Hello,

I am interested in which is the current policy with respect to implementing
the C++ defect reports. I noticed that some defects are implemented in the
code. Others are implemented but "commented away" because they could
break/modify the semantic of existing code (e.g. DR295). Is there an
official policy?

If not, I suggest we implement all the defect reports with TC1 status
into -stdc=c++98 and gnu98, and that we implement all the defect reports
with WP status into a new dialect, -stdc=c++0x.

Comments?

Giovanni Bajo