Thank you! I didn't find this previous proposal when I looked, so thanks!

> Giuseppe D'Angelo via Std-Proposals:
> > The meeting notes are in the wiki, for those who have access
(search for P0041).

I don't know what wiki that is. Do I have access to read it?

> > Note that the implementation is inconsistent with the
specification: you require bidirectional iterators, not forward.

Yes, the specification I had in mind would, and the implementation uses
bidirectional iterators (erroneously named ForwardIt).

Thank you both for quick replies!

Kind regards,
Ted Lyngmo

Den 2025-01-30 kl. 22:08, skrev Sebastian Wittmeier via Std-Proposals:
> The poll result is here - meeting notes no longer online:
>
> https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2016/p0365r0.pdf says:
>
> P0041R0 Unstable remove algorithms Brent Friedman LEWG SG14: Billy Baker
> Mild consensus against proceeding
>
> Further links:
>
> https://quuxplusone.github.io/blog/2020/07/08/erase-if/ (by Arthur)
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13818369/is-stability-of-stdremove-
> and-stdremove-if-design-fail
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/59525400/faster-erase-remove-idiom-
> when-i-dont-care-about-order-and-dont-have-duplicate
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> *Von:* Arthur O‘Dwyer via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]>
> *Gesendet:* Do 30.01.2025 21:01
> *Betreff:* Re: [std-proposals] Floating an idea: unstable_remove_if
> and friends
> *An:* std-proposals_at_[hidden];
> *CC:* Arthur O‘Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer_at_[hidden]>;
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 2:34 PM Ted Lyngmo via Std-Proposals <std-
> proposals_at_[hidden] <mailto:std-proposals_at_[hidden]>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I have an idea for a set of "unstable" erase/remove algorithms
> that will
> move at most as many elements for which the predicate returns true.
>
> https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/
> p0041r0.html <https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/
> papers/2015/p0041r0.html>
> "Unstable remove algorithms" (2015). I know this was in front of
> SG14 many years ago, but I don't know what happened to it; it
> predates the modern GitHub-issue workflow for tracking papers
> (https://wg21.link/p0041/github <https://wg21.link/p0041/github> is
> a 404). Personally, I think it would be plausible to revive — I
> doubt it failed for any particular technical reason.
> You might like to compare/contrast your https://github.com/
> TedLyngmo/liblyncpp/blob/main/include/lyn/algorithm.hpp <https://
> github.com/TedLyngmo/liblyncpp/blob/main/include/lyn/algorithm.hpp>
> with https://github.com/Quuxplusone/SG14/blob/master/include/sg14/
> algorithm_ext.h#L68-L130 <https://github.com/Quuxplusone/SG14/blob/
> master/include/sg14/algorithm_ext.h#L68-L130>
> –Arthur
>
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>
>
>