On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 at 22:31, Ivan Matek via Std-Proposals
<std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 2:51 AM Bill Kerney via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> That's more or less what I'm talking about here. I think the recent revisions have been focused on professionals. But a language's long term growth depends on new people being trained in it to replace the old programmers who are retiring.
>
> I agree, but then again "C++" has no budget to allocate, it depends on contributions from people who are not paid anything to contribute to C++ or companies that are concerned about issues that make their developers more productive. If some billionaire got group of highly talented devs and they worked on a lot of stuff you want(wrote prototypes, wrote nice proposals) I doubt C++ standardization would reject them. But I do not see something like this happening soon.
> So I hope I am wrong, but I see very little from your list getting fixed in next 5y(except maybe networking).

That does sound like a plausible prediction, unfortunate as it may be.
As an example, in case of people for whom Logo and turtlegraphics
were an important part of their programming education, continuing with
the turtlegraphics APIs in Turbo Pascal's BGI, it is a slam dunk
to have proposals that would provide parts of that out-of-the-box in
C++, standardized, available everywhere, but that view isn't shared
by anywhere near all of the committee. There exists quite a
disagreement on whether having something like that is of significant
importance.
And that's not because we don't have those proposals, so the
billionaire wouldn't really solve this.