A Look at C++14: Papers Part 2 -- Meeting C++

A few days ago, we linked to Part 1. As noted there, although the article is labeled “A look at C++14,” not all of these papers are for C++14, and regardless of timeframe not all will be adopted. But it is a useful look at what’s on the commitee’s radar.

Part 2 has just been posted:

A look at C++14: Papers Part 2

This is the second part of my C++ Standardization Papers series. The first part has been received quite well, with more then 5k views in the first two days. Also isocpp.org, Phoronix, lwn.net, a lot of russian blogs and others have linked to it. There also was a nice discussion on reddit. Again, like in Part 1, I want to emphasize, that I only cover part of all papers in this blog post. Also not all of these papers are meant to be happening with C++14, modules & concepts for example are not going to be part of C++14 (at least this is highly unlikely). Still, I will cover those papers too, as some of them will be discussed in Bristol for sure. All papers can be found here.

Some words on C++14. C++14 is not going to be like C++11 changing the language a lot. Its more meant to enhance the language with libraries, and improve or provide bug fixes for C++11. That's why you could call C++14 a minor Standard, and the next major C++ Standard is C++17, at least you could see this as the current plan and road map for C++. But lets have a look at the papers: ...

 

Add a Comment

Comments are closed.

Comments (3)

0 0

niXman said on Apr 2, 2013 09:21 PM:

Why boost.filesystem not included in this list?
0 0

Blog Staff said on Apr 3, 2013 07:27 PM:

@niXman: Boost.FileSystem is not included because it's already well along in processing -- it has its own Study Group (SG3) and is expected to be mostly done this year, initially as a File System Technical Specification (kind of like smart pointers and hash containers first were) and then as part of C++17. See http://isocpp.org/std/the-committee for more on this and nine (9) other Study Groups.
0 0

Meeting C++ said on Apr 4, 2013 03:49 AM:

@niXman
The january mailing had a proposal for filesystem:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2013/n3505.html