Library index is missing many enumerators

[AlisdairM]

May be related to #2972 but I think that is only about the main index.

The library contains a variety of enumerations, or bitfield/mask types that provide names like an enumeration. However, many of the enumerator names, while essentially reserved for use in such library contexts (users cannot name macros the same, etc.), are not listed in the library index.

My search is far from exhaustive, but I started from Annex D code_cvt mode enumerators, and then noticed most/all of the bitfields and bit masks in ios_base are missing, and then filed this ticket.

If we do add these names, how should we describe/index them? As members of their enumerator/surrounding class? Under their own name with an ref back to their host?

Given late filing and potential scale, this issue probably should not be considered before C++23 work starts.

[jensmaurer]

I would say we should index them as if the enumeration were a class and the enumerators were class members. However, some/all enumerations are members of some class, and the non-scoped enumeration names often don't actually show up in source code (because they are transparent).

[jensmaurer]

Editorial meeting: Index enumerators as members of the enumeration "class".

[AlisdairM]

Sorry, just picking this up again now.
I expect there are enough enumerations scattered through the standard that we should pick this up as an early piece of C++26 work, but shout if you want me to file PRs after all the C++23 papers have landed. (I do not have any PRs in waiting)

[AlisdairM]

Ping!

This issue is still marked as C++23. Should I plan to file PRs over the weekend (April 1/2) or should we update the tag to C++26?

[tkoeppe]

I don't feel strongly. If you have time, go ahead and make the PRs, and chances are we can apply them for 23.

[AlisdairM]

Jens got started ahead of me: #7327