cemdervis

pimpl also helps to keep data structure layout stable, e.g. Qt's d-pointer convention

For transparency: That was the previous title of the page. I since changed many things on that site and reworded some fluff. Cheers.

I am not aware of such a thing. Is GitHub itself requesting that when you create a PR, or is it because of the site's editor?

GCC and MSVC are pretty close. fyi, the tables on cppreference are rather outdated at this point. I made a more up-to-date, community-maintained site: https://cppstat.dev/?conformance=cpp20

Glad I could help!

Reminds of something I read somewhere: "I don't love Java, but I love the house it bought me."

Hi, the live search is for developers that want to quickly look up the support for a particular feature. The "missing features" feature and filtering by compiler versions is something I'm currently working on. Any suggestions are welcome, and thanks for your feedback.

Hi, I first designed this site as a way for C++ developers to quickly look up support for particular features (as you've described, in isolation). But in the long run, I think we can extract much more meaning out of these numbers, which is why I added the conformance overview as a first test candidate.

As for feature names: I agree that the paper titles tend to be very technical / niche. However, I didn't want to distort them and rename them, since the site is targeted at the in-the-know population you've mentioned. Do you have an idea how this could be improved?

Regarding the search: This is something I'm working on improving, so that coarse searches like "constexp sharedptr" would correctly yield the constexpr std::shared_ptr proposal.

Hi, thanks. I agree, modules support is kind of there, but not really. I think we could only go by what the compiler vendors state, and add some notes about what's missing.

Hi, I got the initial information from the cppreference compiler support site, then verified with each compiler vendors support tables and updated the information accordingly.

Then I wrote a bot that watches all known (and most importantly, reliable) sources for changes, that then notifies me. The data itself is kept in very simple yaml files. So whenever something changes, I verify and update the info accordingly (The site itself is then regenerated and uploaded automatically).

For features that are not fully implemented yet, or where the vendor does not provide any information (e.g. Apple's conformance table), I set up a conformance test suite on my machine that runs most of these across all toolchains.

Please note that I won't be the only person that maintains this site. I'm in the process of open-sourcing and automating most of it, so that everyone can contribute via GitHub. It's just that keeping up with C++ is part of my job, and also a personal interest of mine. So I do this as a "labour of love".

Thank you very much, I also plan to add more information to the information section of each feature, so that people have the option to TL;DR instead of heading over to the proposals.

Hi, yes, it's just because I'm still trying out some design ideas and am polishing the code. I'm already in the process of open-sourcing it, so that everyone can contribute via GitHub PRs, it's just preparation work that has to be done.

Thanks! I agree to an extent, but it's also the beast the industry married. So as long as it's around, we might as well "deal with it". This page is hopefully one tool that helps with that :)

Hi! That's certainly possible, and also what I'm already doing. However, it's very time-consuming to do it for every single feature. The compiler vendors already provide their feature-support tables for most features, which I've made a small bot for that watches for conformance changes. For feature support that is unclear or not provided by the vendors, I write conformance tests to verify. In my experience, this mix works best.

CMake + Ninja?

Fingers crossed

Swift

The "new" language you're describing sounds like Swift.