←back to thread

67 points cemdervis | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source

Hi HN,

I have created a webpage that displays all C++ features since C++20 in a simple, searchable table.

It is intended to serve as a quick reference for C++ developers, whether as support for cross-platform development or simply to track the current support status out of curiosity.

I created it as a simpler, more structured, and more up-to-date alternative to the cppreference compiler support site. Please note that the page intentionally does not list LWG and CWG papers. This might change as I am continually updating the site and trying out new ideas.

Questions, feedback and suggestions are appreciated, either here or in the form of GitHub issues.

Show context
devnullbrain ◴[] No.45219980[source]
How do you see someone using this page?

Feature names tend not to be very approachable. They often use very precise terminology or refer to papers with names that are targeted for a very in-the-know population.

As an example, one of the features listed is '`constexpr` `std::shared_ptr` and friends'. You seem to have a search that can cope with backticks but this feature doesn't show up if I search for 'constexpr shared_ptr'. That can be solved technically, but the bigger problem is that this feature also changes things for `weak_ptr` - or 'smart pointers' as a concept.

I can't picture a situation where I end up wanting to know the status of that feature's implementation in isolation.

For what it's worth, cppreference isn't any better at this, since it doesn't have any notes on the addition of support for `constexpr`ness of either pointer type. But with enough will I can change that.

replies(1): >>45222062 #
1. cemdervis ◴[] No.45222062[source]
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.