Better C++?

[Jeremy DeHaan]

On Friday, 14 February 2014 at 20:11:19 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 14:28:33 -0500, Frustrated 
> <c1514843 at drdrb.com> wrote:
>
>> Is that not just C+++? When the gc and allocation gets fixed
>> we'll end up with C++++?
>
> No, C+++ isn't valid, and I don't know about C++++, but I'm 
> suspecting no.
>
> The next generation would be C+=2
>
> :P
>
> -Steve

(++C)++

It looks silly, but it's valid in D!