On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 7:55 PM A Johnston via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
> 1. Hello Std Proposals,
>
>
> I would like to show the list the kind of data structure I have used in
> real-time contexts where std::hive is also recommended. [...]
>
> The handle_map is a mapping from a 64-bit handle to a templated value
> type. The handle_map uses a single array for the handle table (and other
> accounting) and a single contiguous array of values for the value array.
>

I haven't looked closely at your code, but this sounds an awful lot like
the well-known(?) data structure also known as "slot_map".
If so, there's another implementation here:—
https://github.com/Quuxplusone/sg14#slot_map-future--c14
https://github.com/Quuxplusone/SG14/blob/master/include/sg14/slot_map.h
and a corresponding proposal (Allan Deutsch, June 2017) here:—
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2017/p0661r0.pdf

The proposal P0661 never went anywhere. (It was seen by LEWG in Toronto,
July 2017; got an 11–4–1–0–0 encouragement for "more work"; and nothing
happened after that AFAIK.)

I'm very skeptical that slot_map belongs in the paper standard, for all the
same reasons that std::hive itself doesn't belong in the paper standard.
Anyone who knows what the thing *is*, will probably be able to implement a
better version of it than their STL vendor can implement. (See also:
std::deque; std::priority_queue; std::flat_map.) I do think it's nice to
have a battle-tested reference implementation (e.g. in Boost; I *don't*
claim that the "SG14" repository I maintain counts as "battle-tested"
enough) that people can consult as prior art for naming and stuff like
that, but (1) I don't think we need *three* reference implementations, and
(2) I don't think we want *any* of our three STL vendors burdened with
creating those reference implementations.

–Arthur