On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 9:19 PM Patrice Roy via Lib <lib@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
Le mar. 4 oct. 2022 à 17:47, Jonathan Wakely <cxx@kayari.org> a écrit :
On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 20:53, Barath Kannan <barathwaj.kannan@gmail.com> wrote:

Which is why I'm inclined to agree with Arthur that people should just write their own erasure abstractions (and if possible, the standard should try to offer tools to make this easier) rather than standardising things like inplace_function and any_invocable.

Agreed. std::function doesn't work well for everybody, but neither will whatever else we come up with. The standard library can't cover every use case.

I understand that.
The SG14 requests we are discussing these days form a somehow coherent whole, which I hope to turn into a somewhat coherent set of papers (not a request for ponies, hopefully). It might take a couple of meetings for us to decide the extent of this set of papers.
The aforementioned inplace_function<T,Sz> would be part of that [...]
 
I'd be interested to hear (perhaps off-list) whether anyone is actually using
https://github.com/WG21-SG14/SG14/blob/master/SG14/inplace_function.h
https://github.com/Quuxplusone/SG14/blob/ajo/include/sg14/inplace_function.h
as a third-party (or vendored) dependency in real life. The first criterion for "should it be in the standard" is always "are people already wanting to use it," and so far I haven't seen clear evidence (in the form of bug reports, feature requests, etc.) that anyone is actually using these things as they exist today.

my $.02,
–Arthur