As WG21 goes, it is a matter of advocacy, persistency, and getting the required votes in the room, at least if the process doesn't change even with how C++26 contracts turned out to be.

▲

aw1621107 19 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean, sure, but that's basically a tautology since that's how everything made it into the standard into the first place. Those are necessary but not sufficient conditions.

▲

tialaramex 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm with you on this and would point at std::hive as an example of the results.

▲

pjmlp 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Not really, in first place it was basically CFront 2.0, alongside C++ARM akin to the K&R C book, with last minute addition of HP STL implementation.

The only piece that wasn't really available and was made in a waterfall design approach was export templates, with the known outcome that no one other than EDG has even bothered implementing it.

Post C++98 is when we got into the "advocacy, persistency, and votes" strategy.

	▲	aw1621107 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You still needed "advocacy, persistency, and votes" to get stuff into C++98. It's just that some things need a lot more of the former to get the latter than others.