› P4130R0 SD-4: Five Correctives Inspired by ISO Directives V. Falco
2026-08-14
Intent
Inform
Doc Date
2026-08-14
Abstract
[SD-4](https://isocpp.org/std/standing-documents/sd-4-wg21-practices-and-procedures) [1] lets the convenor appoint every subgroup chair, set the meeting schedule, and declare consensus.
› P4199R0 A Reader's Guide to the August 2026 Mailing V. Falco
2026-08-14
Intent
Inform
Doc Date
2026-08-14
Abstract
Ten papers deliver a working profiles prototype covering seventy-seven cases of core-language undefined behavior with zero foundational wording changes, propose five governance correctives drawn verbatim from ISO Directives, and document how
› P4238R0 Returning C++26 for the Evaluation It Skipped V. Falco
2026-08-14
Intent
Inform
Doc Date
2026-08-14
Abstract
Contracts entered C++26 through procedural moves that broke no rule yet left no record of having reconciled the sustained technical opposition to the design.
› P4297R1 Severing P3100's Profiles Claim from Its Case-by-Case Review V. Falco , V. Voutilainen
2026-08-14
Intent
Ask
Doc Date
2026-08-14
Abstract
This paper asks EWG (the Evolution Working Group) to sever an unadopted architecture claim from the wording it is bundled with, so that the wording proceeds and the claim gets its own paper and poll.
› P4302R1 Any Delegate May Object to a Poll on an Unmailed Revision V. Falco
2026-08-14
Intent
Ask
Doc Date
2026-08-14
Abstract
WG21 sometimes records polls on paper revisions that did not appear in a pre-meeting mailing. When an in-meeting revision changes the design, recording the poll can shift the consensus burden before national body experts have seen the change.
› P4306R1 Configuring Runtime Checking: Profiles and Implicit Contract Assertions V. Falco , V. Voutilainen
2026-08-14
Intent
Inform
Doc Date
2026-08-14
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
2026-08-14
Intent
Inform
Doc Date
2026-08-14
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
2026-08-14
Intent
Inform
Doc Date
2026-08-14
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
› P4317R1 A Profile for Runtime-Checkable Core-Language Undefined Behavior: std::core_ub V. Falco
2026-08-14
Intent
Inform
Doc Date
2026-08-14
Abstract
P4297R1 [1] asks EWG to sever P3100R8's architecture claim from its case-by-case wording review. This paper demonstrates the severing is feasible.
› P4318R1 Transient Benefit, Perpetual Cost: Implicit Core-Language Assertions V. Falco
2026-08-14
Intent
Inform
Doc Date
2026-08-14
Abstract
Standardizing a continuing (log-and-continue) response for implicit contract assertions on core-language undefined behavior, as a portable guarantee every implementation carries, returns less than it costs.
› P4330R0 Analysis of Contracts Papers V. Falco
2026-08-14
Intent
Inform
Doc Date
2026-08-14
Abstract
This paper examines select papers that propose to extend P2900 contracts. Each paper is evaluated through two lenses:
› P4332R0 Contracts are inappropriate for undefined behavior checks J. Spicer , V. Voutilainen , B. Stroustrup , V. Falco , J. Sanchez
2026-07-31
Doc Date
2026-07-31
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
2026-08-14
