[Andrei]

  * Ignoring a major new language feature may prove disadvantageous for said compiler once competing ones start supporting it.

That may be true, but see attached for historical facts and an elaboration on that point.

-- Gaby

From: Andrei Zissu <andrziss_at_[hidden]m>
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2025 11:16 AM
To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]>
Cc: sg15_at_[hidden]; Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>; sg21_at_[hidden]; Joshua Berne <berne_at_[hidden]>; Tom Honermann <tom_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Re: [isocpp-sg15] [isocpp-sg21] P3835 -- Different contract checking for different libraries



On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 8:02 PM Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]<mailto:gdr_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
[Ville]
> It doesn't. The goal isn't to get some functionality as fast as
> possible, but to get cohesive and correct functionality so that we
> don't run into
> a situation where programmers have unfortunate choices to make, and
> then some need to deal with the support, review, policy and product
> management consequences of those choices.

100%.

Furthermore, WG21 voting something into a stack of papers does not magically make that thing spontaneously appear in your production compiler if said thing is ignored or seen as totally wacky.

Ignoring a major new language feature may prove disadvantageous for said compiler once competing ones start supporting it.

-- Gaby

-----Original Message-----
From: SG15 <sg15-bounces_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15-bounces_at_[hidden]>> On Behalf Of Ville Voutilainen via SG15
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2025 10:38 AM
To: andrziss_at_[hidden]<mailto:andrziss_at_[hidden]>
Cc: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]<mailto:ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>>; sg21_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg21_at_[hidden]>; Joshua Berne <berne_at_[hidden]<mailto:berne_at_[hidden]>>; sg15_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15_at_[hidden]>; Tom Honermann <tom_at_[hidden]<mailto:tom_at_[hidden]>>
Subject: Re: [isocpp-sg15] [isocpp-sg21] P3835 -- Different contract checking for different libraries

On Mon, 27 Oct 2025 at 19:31, Andrei Zissu <andrziss_at_[hidden]<mailto:andrziss_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
>
> And how does having no contracts at all for at least 3 more years help you gain that missing functionality earlier than the current expectation?

It doesn't. The goal isn't to get some functionality as fast as
possible, but to get cohesive and correct functionality so that we
don't run into
a situation where programmers have unfortunate choices to make, and
then some need to deal with the support, review, policy and product
management consequences of those choices.
_______________________________________________
SG15 mailing list
SG15_at_[hidden]<mailto:SG15_at_[hidden]>
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg15