Stroustrup's talk on C++0x

[BCS]

Reply to Bill,

> BCS wrote:
> 
>> Reply to Walter,
>> 
>>> Sean Kelly wrote:
>>> 
>>>> It actually has to be finished by year end 2008, and they have
>>>> committed to getting the standard done on time even if it means
>>>> dropping features. In fact, last I heard, a few features were
>>>> indeed being dropped for lack of time, but I can't recall what they
>>>> were.  I haven't been keeping that close an eye on the C++
>>>> standardization process recently, aside from the new memory model
>>>> and atomic features.
>>>> 
>>> C++0x started out with the stated purpose of just a few core
>>> language tweaks, and a bunch of new libraries. Sometime in the last
>>> couple of years, that was abandoned wholesale and a big raft of
>>> complex new features were proposed.
>>> 
>>> I think it's the success of D that lit the fire.
>>> 
>> Does that make the c++ crowd's main objective to remain as the
>> dominant language?
>> 
> I doubt it.  I think the C++ crowd's main objective is to turn C++
> into something that doesn't suck like a dozen turbine jets strapped
> together with duct tape.

Nice <G>

> They want it to be a better language for
> themselves, because they have to use it every day.  I'm thinking
> specifically of generic and meta-programming functionality.  That's
> what looks like will get the most benefit from the new language
> additions.
> 

Yah, I see your point. However some times the best way to improve somthing 
is to take it out back and shoot it. Not add more jet engines and duck tape.

>> Maybe somebody needs to enforce term limit on programming languages.
>> 
> "You don't vote for kings." -- King Arthur, Monty Python and the Holy
> Grail.
>