Talk:C++23

Over-categorization?
I believe the article C++23 should be taken out of again, since Category:C++ is already a direct or indirect sub-category of them. It should be enough to keep the article in Category:C++, like the other articles about C++ standards. I think we should put the article into Category:Programming language standards, however, again to match the categorization of the other articles. – Tea2min (talk) 07:18, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Category:C++ programming language family
 * Category:Algol programming language family
 * Category:High-level programming languages
 * Category:Programming languages with an ISO standard
 * Category:Statically typed programming languages

The "Article Issues" List Box Is Stupid
The complaints in the "This article has multiple issues" box read like they are created by someone who doesn't understand programming languages. No, the list of changes to C++23 would NOT read better as prose. God, how unreadable/useless would that be? Of course it has many reference to a primary source. It's referencing the relevant submission papers to the the standards committee. "Article reads like a changelog." The article enumerates all the changes going into the new standard. What else would it read like? You cannot assume all articles have to be organized into paragraphs of prose. How narrow-minded is that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.241.240.42 (talk) 17:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC)