[OT] Modules dropped out of C++17

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 19:17:03 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 18:57:17 UTC, ponce wrote:
>> I can't imagine the weird look-up rules that will be made for 
>> a translation unit both using modules and traditional headers. 
>> At the end of the day, another set of rules for C++ers to 
>> remembers.
>
> I wonder when they will realize that a clean break is 
> necessary.  36 years is far too long for a language to keep 
> building on top of the past.  Intel has been hurt by this with 
> x86 recently, probably Microsoft with Windows too.

There's no point in C++ having a clean break. If you're doing 
that, you might as well just create a new language like D. If C++ 
had a clean break, it wouldn't be C++ anymore, and many of the 
folks who continue to use C++ are the ones who want it to be 
backwards compatible. Arguably, if anything, languages like D and 
Rust _are_ the clean break.

- Jonathan M Davis