7 ms·

The committee very politely showed him the door.

• LoganDark 1y ago
  Yes, I got that much, but I'm curious to see what happened. Do you have any links about it?
  • aw1621107 1y ago
    The interpretation is probably up for some debate especially since meeting details are not public, but some relevant links are: - The P3390R0 Safe C++ proposal and the related vote in the 2024-11 Wrocław meeting: https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/2045 https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/2045 - The adoption of the paper P3466 R1 (Re)affirm design principles for future C++ evolution at the same meeting, which contains language which can be interpreted as preemptively foreclosing a Safe C++-style approach: https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/2121 https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/2121
    • tialaramex 1y ago
      P3466 resulted in a new Standing Document for the committee. SD-10 https://isocpp.org/std/standing-documents/sd-10-language-evolution-principles https://isocpp.org/std/standing-documents/sd-10-language-evo... The idea in this document was to write down "principles" of the C++ language without regard to annoying facts which might put those principles in doubt.
• jb1991 1y ago
  Which individual are you referring to?
  • aw1621107 1y ago
    Almost certainly Sean Baxter, the person behind the Safe C++ proposal and its reference implementation (via Circle, which also implements some unrelated features)