VC11 (vNext) to have abysmal support for C++11

Posted by BudVVeezer on Monday September 12, 2011 @02:15PM
from the blogs.msdn.com dept.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2011/09/12/10209291.aspx

( 6 comments | 6 points | on HN )

Re:VC11 (vNext) to have abysmal support for C++11 by wglb on Monday September 12, 2011 @07:23PM (#2989279)

This title is broken; hopefully someone can fix the blatant editorializing it does.

Further, in what world do compiler vendors get this stuff in that quickly? Do you, the poster and editorial title-modifier understand all the implications of these new changes and their interaction with existing code and existing libraries? If you do, you are likely in very small, expert company.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:VC11 (vNext) to have abysmal support for C++11 by jensnockert on Monday September 12, 2011 @04:24PM (#2988751)

It is unfair to expect VC11 to have super C++11 support, it has just been a standard for a few months. Building compilers take time, maybe a more positive headline next time?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:VC11 (vNext) to have abysmal support for C++11 by phaethonx on Monday September 12, 2011 @06:03PM (#2989063)

I think it's unfair to expect C++11 support when they are still working on C99 support.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:VC11 (vNext) to have abysmal support for C++11 by Mavrik on Monday September 12, 2011 @02:40PM (#2988368)

Linkbait.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:VC11 (vNext) to have abysmal support for C++11 by BudVVeezer on Monday September 12, 2011 @02:44PM (#2988386)

How would this be linkbait? Unless you mean "interesting for developers who aren't using GCC or Clang."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:VC11 (vNext) to have abysmal support for C++11 by wccrawford on Monday September 12, 2011 @03:20PM (#2988537)

I think they mean the headline is linkbait. The article has a positive tone, while the headline is extremely negative.

[ Parent | on HN ]