One of the main contributors to the C++ standard library refers to it that way. I can also confirm that many members of the C++ Committee refer to it that way as well.
https://old.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/c90sxa/whats_the_diffe...
That was half a decade ago. I’d be curious if they still feel that way.
From ~10 days ago [0]:
> I'm pretty good at language lawyering code patterns that the STL uses, but I only know a tiny slice of modules.
From a different comment around the same time [1]:
> Life would be easier if we could do a hard migration from classic includes to named modules, but the STL can't do that.
> <snip>
> For MSVC's STL, we have the headers (happy fun land), std.ixx (has to be built by the user, but otherwise is simple), and the separately compiled code that goes into msvcp140.dll/libcpmt.lib (scary town, complicated, always built classically in the VS Build Lab, knows nothing about modules).
[0]: https://old.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/1jb8acg/what_is_curren...
[1]: https://old.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/1jb8acg/what_is_curren...