C++ DBJ Error Concept — Revisited Back in 2019 I wrote C++ DBJ Error Concept, at last, proposing VALSTAT — Value & Status — as an answer to a gap ISO C++ has never closed: there is no standard C++ concept for “how did this call actually go.” Seven years on, the standard still doesn’t have one. The idea might be worth restating. (Certainly std::expected seems not to be widely adopted. My own assertion.) ...
Someone described DBJ Taxonomy this way: “a taxonomy that maps to Zachman-style layers (Strategic/Conceptual → Logical → Physical → Implementations).” Sounds credible. Sadly, it isn’t true. That image is the simplified four-layer version quoted in the claim. It’s not what Zachman actually defined — his framework is a 5×6 matrix (Scope/Business/System/Technology/Component crossed with What/How/Where/Who/When/Why), not a single top-to-bottom stack. The linear “Strategic → Logical → Physical → Implementations” progression is a loose paraphrase, which is also why the mapping claim doesn’t hold up. ...