In article <2vk2nl$kn6@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>, <clamage@taumet.Eng.Sun.COM>
writes:
> In article 467@tango.ics.uci.edu, schmidt@tango.ics.uci.edu (Douglas C.
Schmidt) writes:
> > ...
> >I'm curious whether these changes have resulted in any modification to
> >the original semantics of the C++ for loop?  In particular, ...
> The C++ Committee has voted to change the semantics of defining a
> variable in the first statement of a for-loop header. Under the new
> rules, ...........
> ---
> Steve Clamage, stephen.clamage@eng.sun.com
>
Is there (could there be, should there be, ..) a more
coherent mechanism for tracking / communicating such
changes to the C++ community?

I don't recall having seen this one, or a few others
recently posted, except as responses to specific questions.