Sure, this is the technique that you want to use for programs that you write today. But given that it's using the iterator concepts that have existed for decades, that will be deprecated soon if not now, why claim it's "modern C++"? The only thing I could see in the whole article that wouldn't work in C++98 was range-based for loops. At least they didn't use std::iterator, which was deprecated in C++17.

The title is misleading marketing: It gives the impression you need this nice new blog post instead of all the old out of date ones, and that it's all you'll need to know for the foreseeable future.

Well, regarding "modern C++", I have seen that moniker applied to even language features that were already available in pre-ISO C++98, like RAII, or type safe collections.

Apparently too many people still keep using C++ compilers to compile C code, not surprising when there are schools still using Turbo C++ for MS-DOS as teaching tool, as per one of Bjarne talks.

Back to C++20, C++ is no longer my main tool, but I still follow up on it and one of my hobbies is checking new standard features, hardly everything works at is supposed to be and I expect the usual three years for stabilization, so when C++23 will be around the corner, is when I expect all major compilers to fully support C++20 without triggering some kind of compiler error.

> regarding "modern C++", I have seen that moniker applied to even language features that were already available in pre-ISO C++98, like RAII, or type safe collections.

That's not surprising as modern C++ predates C++11. Newer standards "merely" make it more convenient to practice it.

At the end of the day, modern c++ is really about emphasizing value types, RAII and parametric polymorphism as opposed to OOP.

Anyway, these days we have it good conformance to new standards comes relatively quickly. It took forever for most compilers to be C+98 conformant (and technically most never reached it).