WG21 PAPERS

Mailings Beta

Volunteer-driven · Not affiliated with WG21 or ISO

Filter and export papers from the C++ Committee’s monthly mailings by time frame and audience using the options below, or refine your export further with the Select button. Links point directly to the official WG21 papers on open-std.org.

Submit Issue C++ Standards Committee Papers

Select	Paper	Title	Authors	Audience	Doc Date
	P4306R1	Configuring Runtime Checking: Profiles and Implicit Contract Assertions	V. Falco, V. Voutilainen	WG21	2026-08-14
Intent Inform Doc Date 2026-08-14 Mailing Date 2026-08 Unassigned Author(s) Vinnie Falco, Ville Voutilainen Target Audience WG21 Revisions R0 Tracking issue View on GitHub Abstract P3100R8 proposes that implicit contract assertions, configured through Contracts evaluation semantics and Labels, control runtime checking of core-language undefined behavior. The Profiles papers, P3589R2 and P3984R0, instead make a Profile the named mechanism that selects and defines such guarantees.
	P4308R1	Eight Responses to a Throwing Implicit Contract Assertion	V. Falco, V. Voutilainen	WG21	2026-08-14
Intent Inform Doc Date 2026-08-14 Mailing Date 2026-08 Unassigned Author(s) Vinnie Falco, Ville Voutilainen Target Audience WG21 Revisions R0 Tracking issue View on GitHub Abstract The response space for a throwing implicit contract assertion contains at least eight options, not the four before EWG.
	P4310R1	Hasta la Vista, Undefined Behavior: Why std::core_ub Should Terminate by Default	V. Falco, V. Voutilainen	WG21	2026-08-14
Intent Inform Doc Date 2026-08-14 Mailing Date 2026-08 Unassigned Author(s) Vinnie Falco, Ville Voutilainen Target Audience WG21 Revisions R0 Tracking issue View on GitHub Abstract `std::core_ub` (P4317R1) guards the runtime-checkable cases of core-language undefined behaviour and, when enforced, guarantees the check runs. It leaves one question open: after a guarded violation is detected, does the program continue or terminate? This paper answers terminate. Whether contracts are the right substrate for these checks at all is argued against them in P4332R0; this paper takes
	P4332R0	Contracts are inappropriate for undefined behavior checks	J. Spicer, V. Voutilainen, B. Stroustrup, V. Falco, J. Sanchez	EWG SG23 WG21	2026-07-31
Doc Date 2026-07-31 Mailing Date 2026-08 Unassigned Author(s) John Spicer, Ville Voutilainen, Bjarne Stroustrup, Vinnie Falco, Jose Daniel Garcia Sanchez Target Audience EWG SG23 WG21 Abstract This document makes one narrow claim: that the mechanism P2900 defines for contract assertions is the wrong mechanism for checks whose purpose is to detect or mitigate core-language undefined behavior, as proposed by P3100. The claim does not depend on any hostile reading of contracts. It follows from what the contracts proposal says about itself: P3846R1 concedes that guaranteed enforcement is a
	P4334R0	P2900 Contracts’ fundamental flaws	B. Stroustrup, J. Garcia, V. Falco, J. Spicer, V. Voutilainen	WG21	2026-08-14
Doc Date 2026-08-14 Mailing Date 2026-08 Unassigned Author(s) Bjarne Stroustrup, J-Daniel Garcia, Vinnie Falco, John Spicer, Ville Voutilainen Target Audience WG21

Showing 5 of 5 papers · source: open-std.org

Mailings Beta

Sign in