C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: How about a committee library as well as a standard library? (was Fwd: Distributed random number ordering)

From: Eyal Rozenberg <eyalroz1_at_[hidden]>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 17:26:32 +0300
On 14/05/2021 13:59, Guy Cpp via Std-Proposals wrote:
> Not everything needs to go in the standard library. Discovery is a
> problem though. Why doesn't the committee host a library of useful things?

You seem to be making several assumptions:

1. It is within the committee's mandate/scope of activities to improve
discoverability of C++ libraries.

2. A committee-hosted/committee-blessed set of libraries will be
significantly more discoverable than such libraries are today.

I'm somewhat doubtful of (1.), although I might be wrong. I'm pretty
sure (2.) is not true. Most C++ developers are barely aware, if at all,
of the existence of the standardization committee.

However, as Richard Hodges suggests - perhpas you're actually hinting at
the equivalent of the standard(ish) package manager that some languages
sport - Python (pip & PyPI), Rust (cargo), Ruby (gem), Javascript (npm)
and so on?

If that's what you mean - that's not exactly what you've written. You've
focused on blessing specific libraries rather than formalizing/blessing
a library discovery mechanism. The latter seems closer to what the
committee would consider.

Received on 2021-05-14 09:26:38