Post

Andrew Lilley Brinker
@alilleybrinker.com

A large number of National Bodies (country-specific standards orgs participating in WG21 at ISO) abstained or voted against approving C++26. NBs vote as units for the approval of a complete draft standard. The main sticking point is about contracts.

Steve Klabnik@steveklabnik.com

Holy shit! lnkd.in/p/g3r98kNM

lnkd.inBalloting has completed for C++26. Unfortunately it was Disapproved P-Members voting: 12 in favor out of 20 = 60 % (requirement >= 66.66%) (P-Members having abstained are not counted in th...Balloting has completed for C++26. Unfortunately it was Disapproved P-Members voting: 12 in favor out of 20 = 60 % (requirement >= 66.66%) (P-Members having abstained are not counted in this vote.) M...
Andrew Lilley Brinker
@alilleybrinker.com

This kind of last-minute disruptive and wasteful rejection is exactly what WG21’s slow deliberative process is supposed to avoid.

0 reposts31 likes

Andrew Lilley Brinker
@alilleybrinker.com

IMO, if C++ really fails to ship contracts here, thereby slipping them to C++29 at the earliest, it’s another nail in the coffin and C++ will continue on its slow decline toward being a legacy language.

Lucretiel
@lucretiel.me

Was surprised to learn that every other draft has apparently passed unanimously, making it all the more surprising that this one even missed that mark, let alone missing 2/3s

lonjil
@lonjil.net

It's probably less surprising if you know how dysfunctional the whole process has been. C++ contracts as they currently exist are riddled with implementation defined and undefined behavior, to the point where they probably aren't useful at all. Discussions didn't really go anywhere and the fraction/

lonjil
@lonjil.net

of the committee who had objections mostly just focused on getting their own features into the standard. Most members haven't been involved one way or the other, and may now have voted against it due to seeing that none of the issues raised before ever actually got fixed.