Where to find the state of ISO C++ evolution

After each ISO C++ meeting, I post a trip report update to my blog summarizing what’s new as of that meeting with a drill-down into some highlights. But wouldn’t it be handy to have an up-to-date summary scorecard with a snapshot of all proposals’ status to date? Indeed it would, and so today someone asked me in email:

I’m a software developer interested in forthcoming C++ standard. Are there any resources on the web where can I find
list of already accepted proposals as of the last meeting in Bellevue? I know that I can read the draft but I would like to have all new features in a list form.

Answer: Yes, thanks to the gracious volunteer efforts of Alisdair Meredith. Alisdair maintains the “State of C++ Evolution” paper, and posts updated versions before and after each ISO committee meeting. You can find the current one here:

For updates, just watch the committee papers pages where new batches of papers get posted every two or three months, including new versions of the evolution status paper and new updated working drafts of the next ISO C++ standard (maintained by our hardworking, and amazingly tireless, project editor Pete Becker).

Thanks, Alisdair and Pete!

Notes

1. Yes, Pete’s car has wheels. That’s not what I meant.

4 thoughts on “Where to find the state of ISO C++ evolution

  1. Last time I looked for this kind of information, I was forwarded to the comp.lang.c++ newsgroup ;)

    I’m glad to see this kiond of papers.

  2. The wikipedia article has a higher level and much more readable summary that appears to be kept fairly up to date.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B0x

    Comparatively whereas the State of C++ Evolution paper is probably essential for people actually going to the standards meetings, contributing to the debate, and writing compilers, it has excessive detail for the larger C++ community.

  3. The reason I didn’t reference the Wikipedia C++0x page is that the last time I looked (sometime last year) it contained a lot of inaccuracy and outright misinformation. Someone mentioned this issue on the committee email reflectors, and several people said they’d try to help gradually improve it. During a quick skim today I still noticed some places that are wrong and need fixing, but it has improved a lot.

    Also, the original emailer’s question was more specific: He wanted to know about the state of specific proposals as of the last meeting. I agree that’s more specific than most people need to know.

  4. Those overview pages are really good. The wikipedia page is interesting. However, I prefer having the proposal at hand, as it is often better than just a high-level overview of the idea (see the Thread proposal: Looking at the proposed API and Boost.Threads, I can immediately see whether the Boost API will be conforming). Especially as the proposals are usually easy to read.

    Only thing left is a page with the release dates for compilers that will support all of C++0x’ glory ;)

Comments are closed.