ISO C++标准草案
在ISO标准C++中：最新的工作草案是n3291，它不公开。但n3290可用。截至 2 月，草案为 n3242。我现在可以知道..哪一个草案更适合成为最终草案？因为n3242与n3290相比有很多差异？
在此链接中，他们还给出了..：当前工作草案为 n3242 ? （为什么不n3290）
http://www.open- std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B0x
请告诉我应该遵循哪个草案是正确的（直到最终草案发布）？
In the ISO standard C++ : the latest working draft is n3291 ,it is not publicly available. But n3290 is Available. up-to February the draft is n3242. May i know now .. which draft is more correct to become an final draft? Because there are many differences in n3242 compared with n3290 ?
in this link also they gave ..: current working draft as n3242 ? (why not n3290)
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B0x
please tell me which draft is correct one to follow (till the final draft release ) ?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（2）
有一段时间，n3291 可以通过明显的 URL 获得（只需在 Wikipedia 链接中搜索并用
n3291替换n3242）。但我猜有人认为这与最终版本太接近，因此无法再访问。因此维基百科不会链接到它，因为没有什么可以链接到的。
当 n3291 可用时，我确实藏了起来。我没有进行详尽的搜索，但似乎没有实质性的变化；只是澄清。例如，n3242第1.8（6）节内容如下：
而 n3291 的同一部分内容如下：
（n3291 使用红色删除线和蓝色下划线文本来突出显示 n3242 的更改，因此不难找到这个示例。）
如果有人能够提出令人信服的论据，证明我重新发布 n3291 是合法的，我会很高兴能够提供它。在下载之前我当然不需要输入任何密码，甚至不需要单击协议...
[更新：在这个答案的第一个版本中，当我的意思是“n3291”时，我写了“n3290”。有点奇怪的是，“工作草案”的数量比“最终版本”的数量要高。无论如何，一段时间内免费提供的是 n3291。]
[更新 2：N3337 是next C++ 标准的初始草案，它与C++11 最终标准。请参阅：
C++11 标准和免费草案 N3337 之间的章节号是否不同？
因此，您可以选择免费草案;官方标准之前的最后一个 (N3242) 和官方标准之后的第一个 (N3337)。所有似乎都使用相同的段落编号。]
For a while, n3291 was available from the obvious URL (just search and replace
n3242withn3291in the Wikipedia link). But I guess somebody decided that was too close to the final version so it is no longer accessible.Thus Wikipedia does not link to it because there is nothing to link to.
I did stash away a copy of n3291 while it was available. I have not done an exhaustive search, but there appear to be no substantive changes; only clarifications. For example, section 1.8 (6) of n3242 reads:
While the same section of n3291 reads:
(n3291 uses red strike-through and underlined blue text to highlight changes from n3242, so it was not hard to find this example.)
If someone can make a convincing argument that it would be legal for me to re-publish n3291, I would be happy to make it available. I certainly did not have to enter any password or even click on an agreement before downloading it...
[Update: In my first version of this answer, I wrote "n3290" when I meant "n3291". Kind of weird that the "working draft" has a higher number than the "final version". Anyway, what was freely available for a while was n3291.]
[Update 2: N3337 is an initial draft of the next C++ standard, and it is very similar to the C++11 final standard. See:
Do section numbers differ between the C++11 standard and the gratis draft N3337?
So you have your choice of free drafts; the last one before the official standard (N3242), and the first one after it (N3337). All appear to use the same paragraph numbering.]
N3290 和 N3291 的区别在于扉页。 N3291 表示“工作草案”；另一个则不然。除此之外，他们说的是同样的话。
遗憾的是，由于 ISO 问题，两者都无法在线获取。最终标准可能只包含相对于 N3290 相当小的更改，因此它们太接近最终版本而无法发布。特别是考虑到 N3291 被选为 FDIS。
The difference between N3290 and N3291 is the title page. N3291 says "Working Draft;" the other one doesn't. Other than that, they say the same thing.
Sadly, neither is available online due to ISO issues. The final standard will probably only contain fairly minor changes from N3290, so they're too close to final to publish. Especially considering that N3291 was voted as the FDIS.