Initial implementation of when_all_range (incomplete)

[maikel]

No description provided.

[copy-pr-bot]

This pull request requires additional validation before any workflows can run on NVIDIA's runners.

Pull request vetters can view their responsibilities here.

Contributors can view more details about this message here.

[lixin-wei]

Oh this is exactly what I need!

Is this planning to go into the C++ standard? Or it's only a stdexec's own utils?

[ericniebler]

@lixin-wei it will not be in c++26. i don't currently have plans to write a proposal for when_all_range for c++29. maybe you would like to try?

[lixin-wei]

@ericniebler I'm very excited to have I try! I haven't written any proposal before, would you please give me a bit guide, telling me what sections you'd like to see in the proposal? I'll fill the details according to your catalogue.

[ericniebler]

@lixin-wei i would be happy to help. you can structure you paper like https://isocpp.org/files/papers/P3284R4.html, which proposes to add some algorithms to std::execution. the source for this paper is at https://github.com/ericniebler/wg21/blob/main/P3284/P3284.md. i use @mpark's pandoc framework. you can find the documentation for it here: https://github.com/mpark/wg21

[lixin-wei]

@ericniebler Thank you so much for the guide. I've written a basic veriosn: Rendered PDF / source code(edited since email notification). Would you pls have a look when you have time?

And may I ask you 2 more questions?

1. Should I provide a complete wording for the standard now? I find it's not trivial, when_all's spec is very long, should I make a similar copy for when_all_range, which will mostly differ in the wording of impls-for<when_all_t>?
2. What's the next steps? How can I get an official number(PXXXX) for this proposal? Should I send to the std-proposal mailing list as this page says. Or it's enough to review with you?