When will C++0x be finished? [closed]

Question

Ok, this is the first question I've asked and I didn't know you couldn't answer your own question.

Answer:

March 25, 2011. :-) I'm not kidding, it's official. Well, at least as far as the committee is concerned.

Update

Aug. 12, 2011.

The C++ FDIS has officially been approved by ISO in a unanimous vote. 21 of 21 National Bodies voted to APPROVE.

Biomass

Sorry. If this information isn't useful to those interested in the C++0x tag, I'm happy to have this question deleted. – Biomass

Wait, that is today. Is it finished then? – Kaylor

I'm very interested, thanks for the update! – Arielle

Is there a reliable reference that confirms this? – Harville

@SB: Sorry, not yet. I have no paper to point to. The final draft will be publicly available about April 13. From here the process is bureaucratic. But the committee is done with the technical work. – Biomass

@Howard, I'm really happy to hear that, even unofficially. But I don't think it belongs here now. When there's a definitive source to link to in an answer, someone can create a new question. There is no problem with answering your own question. – Remonstrant

@Howard, I apologize if I came across wrong. Basically, I encourage you to come back and post (and optionally answer yourself) a new question when there's a definitive link. – Remonstrant

@Matthew: No problems. We're celebrating here in Madrid. Geeks like me celebrate by spreading the word. :-) – Biomass

@Howard: If you are on the committee, then you personally are an authoritative source, that's all @SB and @Matthew are looking for. But you have to state your credentials. Also, you should have been able to post an answer on your own question. – Expiation

the author of - open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2094.html ? – Garmon

Looking forward to the news showing up on a more official venue :) – Garmon

@luke: By "more official venue" do you mean something like the WG21 website, or would Herb Sutter's blog suffice? – Weinshienk

@Howard: A sincere congratulations and thanks to you and all the rest of the committee members. This is most exciting news. – Weinshienk

@James McNellis: just saw that, and of course :) – Garmon

Herb Sutter blogged this yesterday, but this is a pretty lame piece of spam for Stack Overflow. – Balf

@Matthew: I was delighted to see Howard's post! I find your complaints impossible to comprehend. – Aran

@Tony, I'm very happy (and grateful) too, and I didn't mean to complain. I just think it would have been a better to wait until there was a definitive reference. – Remonstrant

@Matthew: why? This isn't Wikipedia. We know what he's saying is true, and if it turns out it isn't, he will get downvoted. – Lorettelorgnette

@Howard hmm, that's odd. You've always been able to answer your own questions before. May have been a time delay preventing you from answering it instantly. I've posted an answer for now, but if you're able to answer now, feel free to do so. – Lorettelorgnette

Also, I removed the "this is a rhetorical question" bit from your question, since that seems to upset some people. Better to just ask the question "plainly" and then answer it. :) And last but not least, congratulations, and a big thank you! – Lorettelorgnette

I don't get all the pedantic nerd-rage over this question, by the way. It is a perfectly valid question, which has been asked a lot up until now. And now, for the first time, we actually have an answer, so why shouldn't we get it on SO? And yet you guys prefer to bicker about how the question should be phrased, and vote to close it? Grow up... How about spending your time on something productive? Write some answers, or improve this or other questions, rather than just assaulting the people who actually bother to share their knowledge with others. – Lorettelorgnette

That is good news. But another question must be asked. When will C++0x will be fully supperted by the compilers like MSVC, GCC or Intel C++? – Linen

@sad_man: For GCC, you can find a list of the implemented features here. And MSVC didn't publish such a list yet, afaik. And I don't know anything about Intel C++, sorry. :) – Choirboy

I'd just like to say, you're my hero, Howard E. Hinnant. – Listless

possible duplicate of C++0X when? – Block

Do we have to vote on it before we know what's in it??? – Ringent

@Howard: Congratulations and thank you! I hope it won't be too long before you make another announcement. Concepts for C++-0F anyone? Plus more libraries... – Mercurochrome

There is a lot of misinformation here: When will C++0x be finished? the answer is the same as it has always been in the last decade: Never. On the other hand, the C++1x had been finished. – Lastly

@LieRyan: no, I think you just introduced the first piece of misinformation. C++11 is not, and has never been, C++1x. C++0x was an unofficial nickname. It didn't have to make sense. It was still C++0x even after it was clear that it'll never be finished in the "0x" decade. But C++1x has never been widely used to refer to what is now known as C++11. – Lorettelorgnette

@jalf: tongue-in-cheek fails :) – Lastly

Answer 1

As Howard already said in the question, the final draft was completed on March 25, 2011.

There will now be some months of editorial changes, voting and ISO red tape before it officially becomes a standard, but on the 25th, the standards committee themselves officially signed off on it.

Sources:

https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/5894415f-be62-4bc0-81c5-3956e82276f3/entry/the_c_0x_standard_has_been_approved_to_ship23?lang=en

http://herbsutter.com/2011/03/25/we-have-fdis-trip-report-march-2011-c-standards-meeting/

http://twitter.com/#!/sdt_intel/status/51328822066417665

and of course, Howard Hinnant, who asked the question, is on the committee as well, so he's not making it up.

(Only posting this as a "real" answer because Howard apparently was unable to answer his own question)

Edit
And as of September 1st, 2011, C++11 has been published by ISO. It doesn't get any more official than that. We have a new standard.

Lorettelorgnette

Thanks Jalf!!!! (four exclamation marks because this box demanded 3 more characters :-)) – Biomass

No, thank you, and the rest of the committee, for all your hard work ;) – Lorettelorgnette

Answer 2

The Final Draft International Standard (FDIS) was available on the WG21 website, however, it has now been removed, apparently for good. Herb Sutter said in reply to an inquiry on his blog:

All C++ committee documents are public, except for membership lists and the final text of the standard. ISO rules, sorry — I did ask permission to leave the draft unprotected, but ISO prohibits sharing the final text of FCD and FDIS documents, so ISO said no because that draft is technically identical to the FDIS and differs from the final FDIS text by only the cover page.

Therefore, the publicly available document closest to the FDIS in content is the working draft from the mailing that immediately preceded the Madrid meeting, N3242.

---

The Final Draft International Standard (FDIS) is now available on the WG21 website:

• N3290 [10.1MB PDF]

Weinshienk

The FDIS is no longer publicly available on WG21's website. – Block

Well, I've asked Stefanus Du Toit where the PDF went; maybe this is just a mistake. – Weinshienk

@Fred: According to Herb, the FDIS is no longer available, and probably shouldn't have been made publicly available in the first place per ISO rules (see this comment on his blog). That is unfortunate for those who didn't download it while it was available. I suppose I shall have to delete this answer since it no longer makes sense. – Weinshienk

Answer 3

C++0x will have been finished last Thursday! The ISO/IEC 14882:2011 standard was published on the 1st of September of 2011. What was informally known as C++0x before is now C++11.

Madura