libstdc++: questions about P3663

[Luc Grosheintz]

On 11/12/25 09:06, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
> The definition are only introduced to serve the later wording, if we reffer
> to collapsing
> slice in the context where the slice types are not already canonical, then
> we have real issue.
> If not, this is OK.

I looked and  didn't notice such a case. In that sense it's a
purely cosmetic issue.

I think I've completed the tests that check the mandates/pre-
requisites for P3663. Did P3663 make it into the next version of
the standard? Currently, the changes for P3663 are still in
commits that are separate from adding submdspan_extents, etc.
It's now time to polish them (white-space, commit messages, ...).

How would you like to receive the next sequence of changes?
   - Add features as in N5014; then update all to P3663.
   - Add features as in P3663.

Thanks!
Luc