Balloting has completed for C++26. Unfortunately it was Disapproved

Robert Seacord’s Post 17h 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.) Member bodies voting: 9 negative votes out of 22 = 41 % (requirement <= 25%) Sort of a sad day for the C++ community. Hopefully we can heal and move on from this in a productive manner. Why should this be a sad day for the C++ community? Taking into account the number of P-members who abstained due to a lack of consensus, which makes the NO vote even more significant, sinking such a flawed contracts proposal is a good sign of a healthy, engaged, and competent community at the national body level. That some people were willing to put the entire C++26 standard at risk to push through such a controversial and deeply flawed proposal is, of course, concerning. Fortunately, the national bodies recognized the problem before it was too late. And perhaps it is also a clear signal that WG21's 'experts in the room' voting approach needs to be reconsidered. Not only that Robert Seacord. There were 12 countries that abstained. In several cases because they could not reach to a common position. That is another signal of a contested draft. Please, note that before C++26 all other standards passed unanimously. I assume this was not a complete surprise and that those who voted against it had voiced opposition or at least reservations previously? Is the most promising path forward to reduce the scope and try again? Or were there things excluded that people really wanted? Such is the life of standards. Anything particular? I don't get the arithmetic to work out? 12 in favor out of 20 who did not abstain gets 8 voting against, but then we have 9 negative votes out of 22? Not that it matters terribly since it doesn't seem very close. It is hard to heal after the decades of the same social issues reappearing. What lessons should we learn to be able to move on in a productive manner? So sad to hear this, but indeed, let's learn from this, and regroup and move on. It's so over It is easy. Turns back the ship to use Common Lisp and all of this goes away. See more comments To view or add a comment, sign in More from this author Explore content categories