Stroustrup's talk on C++0x

[James Dennett]

Walter Bright wrote:
> 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.

Most of these features have been in development for years;
it's desires to improve C++ that have lit these fires, just
as your urge to create D was based on other ideas about how
to improve on C++98.  For many involved in language design,
it's language features that are more tempting than new
library functionality.

I don't see much in C++0x that has much claim to being
inspired by D.  I look forward to type deduction with
auto, but that dates from the 80's.  Concepts will be
great, but those have most overlap with Haskell's
typeclasses, not mirrored in D.  The new for syntax
reflects many languages (D, Perl, Java, sh, others)
in some ways.  GC for C++ predates D.  The smart
pointers have no counterpart in D, yet.

D has cool metaprogramming facilities, and does some
other things nicely, but C++ faces more competition
at this time from C, C# and Java than it does from D.

It would, however, seem reasonable for C++ to pick up
on good features of D, when they are a match for C++,
just as C# and Java have borrowed features back and
forth.

-- James