On 10/21/25 11:47 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2025 at 12:20, Timur Doumler <cpp_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I understand the calls for real deployment experience, but I don't understand how is a Contracts TS or whitepaper would help us get that?
> Well, see, it's actually less about what the ship vehicle
> semi-magically (I'm intentionally joking here) does. It's about what
> chance anyone
> has to experiment with the feature before we nail it into an IS.
>
> Let's face it, it's excruciatingly difficult and therefore unlikely
> for so-called third parties to experiment with what we have right now.
> You would
> need to build a fork-branch compiler, and then deploy that and then do
> the actual experimentation. That by nature shuts out quite a bunch of
> users.

The following is intended as a serious question; I'm not intending to
throw shade at other C++26 features.

The only implementation of P2996 reflection is in the same state of
requiring a fork-branch compiler build of Clang. I'm assuming you
consider that implementation sufficient for reflection because I don't
see papers calling for its removal due to lack of deployment experience.
There has been no deployment experience of P2996 reflection. Why is that
sufficient for reflection, but not sufficient for contracts?

Tom.