Eh? I don't understand which kind of involvement. I occassionally read C++ proposals, and also read blogs from some very good C++ programmers. The "everything

Eh? I don't understand which kind of involvement. I occassionally read C++ proposals, and also read blogs from some very good C++ programmers. The "everything implemented as library" pattern so pervasive in new C++ releases is not doing any good to the language. All those are half-baked implementation of what exists as a simple orthogonal language feature in languages like OCaml. The "implement as library" sentiment has gone too far that it hurts, among other things: * Debug build performance * Compilation times (a big thing) * Quality of error messages * Reliance on not-so-reliable optimizations, often causing performance regressions (there are many instances of this happening). Even if clang / gcc developers are involved, probably they don't bother about 1000::template shittery because their compilers have already got comparable quality inliners, and it is hard for a competition to surface here. Or they might bother but can't be sufficiently involved into the C++ standard committee crowd. > Furthermore, C++ coding experience improves markedly with each new Standard, released on a 3-year cadence. And don't tell me my knowledge of last standard is obsolete and I have to read the new shiny c++ book to learn Modern C++. Another consequence is the scarcity of freely available resources accessible to students, due to rapid change.