Stroustrup's slides about c++11 and c++14

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 9/13/2014 1:10 PM, eles wrote:
> This presentation:
>
> https://parasol.tamu.edu/people/bs/622-GP/C++14TAMU.pdf
>
> He criticizes C99 VLA (slide 24) as being "an abomination"
>
> But the surprise comes at the end (slide 57), where he also criticizes... the
> static if as being "a total abomination". Well, this is D, I told myself.
>
> Are those points valid?:
>
> static if is a total abomination
> • Unstructured, can do everything (just like goto)
> • Complicates static analysis (AST-based tools get hard to write)
> • Blocks the path for concepts
> • Specifies how things are done (implementation)
> • Is three slightly different “ifs” using a common syntax
> • Redefines the meaning of common notation (such as { ... })
>

Yeah, well, we have many years of experience with "static if" and no apocalypse 
has yet happened.

The proposal:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3329.pdf

Bjarne's rebuttal:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2013/n3613.pdf


C++ is adopting D features anyway. The constexpr proposals are looking a lot 
like CTFE :-)