C++ Committee's Library Evolution Working Group
summary
Discussion lays out concrete progress and process: executors aim for C++23 but need more review, the incubator and mailing-list reviews speed papers, and the committee assigns priorities with a new plan. Examples that moved forward include range fixes for move-only iterators and a well-shaped process proposal; current library work highlights string_view, span, function_ref, and constexpr/reflection gaps (constexpr math needs cross‑target accuracy work). Good if wanting status, risks, and next technical hurdles.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (14)
- 0:00Introduction and panel setup
- 2:17What belongs in the standard library
- 7:36Prioritizing standard library changes
- 12:12Constexpr math functions debate
- 14:25Executors in C++23
- 16:36Reference STL implementation feasibility
- 20:55Teaching the standard library effectively
- 29:03Why professors avoid teaching STL
- 31:31Most misunderstood STL components
- 35:29LEWG vs LWG process explained
- 44:35Async I/O and future roadmap
- 47:10Incubator success stories
- 50:01Providing feedback to the committee
- 56:26Fun questions and closing remarks
related talks
01h 25mGrill the C++ Committee
19mDemystifying the C++ Committee
01h 25mGrill the C++ committee
01h 32mThe 10 Essential Features for the Future of C++ Libraries
01h 33mCommittee Fireside Chat
03mThe Beman Project: Testing C++ Library Proposals Before Standardization
01h 03mC++17 part 2: The Library Features
01h 29mWhat Does It Take to Implement the C++ Standard Library?