A Tour of C++, 3rd edition (covering C++20 plus a few likely features of C++23)

Re:A Tour of C++, 3rd edition (covering C++20 plus a few lik... by tialaramex on Sunday October 30, 2022 @01:12PM (#33396367)

It's not so much about "the ABI vote", it's the larger direction summarised in P2137 ("Goals and priorities for C++"")

As I understand it, P2137 was written to explicitly spell out the requirements so that there's an actual document saying C++ should prioritise safety and performance over compatibility, which WG21 voted against - making firm the fact that's not what C++ is about.

Left to its own devices, WG21 prefers ambiguity. This is infuriating if you need X, and you tell people "I need X, I can't get that from C++" and they will tell you "No, I'm sure you can have X, maybe the committee just doesn't understand your need" and wasting your time. It needed writing down on paper to ensure there's no room for that ambiguity.

Kate Gregory is one of the key Carbon people and if she had any "activities in clang" I'm not aware of them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Tour of C++, 3rd edition (covering C++20 plus a few lik... by pjmlp on Sunday October 30, 2022 @02:19PM (#33397100)

And in Rust one needs to write a RFC, and also not without going through endless discussion threads until a moderator locks them, in some more hot topics.

True for Kate Gregory, but not for many others.

[ Parent | on HN ]