C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: Weird tweet about C++20

From: Gennaro Prota <gennaro.prota_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 12:53:50 +0200
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 4:51 PM Tom Honermann <tom_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 6/10/21 5:10 AM, Gennaro Prota via Std-Discussion wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:50 PM Brian Bi via Std-Discussion
> <std-discussion_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Can someone provide a link to the document that contains the revisions that the committee is recommending to implementation vendors?
> I still think that yours is a natural and legitimate question, and that
> there should be such a document.
> Perhaps the document you have in mind is something like P2131R0. I
> don't know if maintenance of that paper is planned. I would not be
> surprised if such a paper contrasting C++20 and C++23 materializes
> once C++23 is approved. I recognize that the lack of a "live"
> publicly available document is unfortunate, but implementors know
> where to find this information.

That's about what happens in some software teams, where crucial
documentation is only in someone's head.

If C++ is a public standard, it must also be a) for users b) for anyone
deciding to implement a compiler next year and not having participated
into standardization.

Otherwise why bothering with a public spec at all.

.:: Gennaro Prota ::.
.:: https://about.me/gennaro ::.

Received on 2021-06-16 05:54:32