Talk:C++03

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

Expansion of library

I think that the statement "C++03 [...] significantly expands the size of the standard library." is wrong. The source given for that doesn't back this statement up in any way. On the contraray, with the statement "From a programmer's view there is none." (refering to the difference between C++98 and C++03) in the source it seems highly unlikely, since the standard library is of high importance to any programmer using the language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.14.232.22 (talk) 08:44, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just added a "dubious" template. Before I discovered this talk entry, I had a dubious argument reading: reason=Statement cited bsfaq, which emphatically does not say this, and it appears to me to be an editor's confusion with additions that later became TR1. — MaxEnt 18:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed this statement. It is just plain wrong. 206.55.177.99 (talk) 23:08, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on C++03. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.stroustrup.com/bs_faq.html#C++03

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:24, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sunmist3 (talk) 23:31, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Need a source

The statement "While most implementations satisfied this expectation, it was not required by C++98" should be sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czipperz (talk • contribs) 22:23, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]