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

[Elie Morisse via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 13 September 2014 at 20:10:55 UTC, eles wrote:
> 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 { ... })

The lack of « something like static if » in C++ and his 
opposition to it (which dates back from many years ago) is what 
made me search for better languages and discover D.

C++ has only half-assed metaprogramming limited to types, and the 
lack of static if has forced me so many times to rewrite very 
similar code from one function to another.

With D I can have a « function skeleton » and avoid all 
redundancies with static if. Plus mixins expand enormously on the 
C preprocessor (although AST macros would be even better).


IMHO it's all good for D, full-featured metaprogramming is a 
killer feature and can save a great amount of time and headaches. 
The more backwards C++ chooses to remain the faster alternatives 
will grow.