C++17

[bachmeier via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 at 20:25:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 at 19:33:04 UTC, bachmeier wrote:

>
> That's not actually true. Many C++ programmer express a dislike 
> for how the the syntax has developed over time, all the weird 
> corner-cases, the obfuscated meta programming mechanisms and 
> unpredictable implicitness when trying to do more advanced 
> typing. Just getting the right constructor to fire can be a 
> challenge.
>
> The general C++ semantics are good enough, but the language has 
> to many weird aspects to it that is "beyond repair" and that 
> makes C++ programming time consuming.

The problem is that "C++ programmers" is not a random sample. 
It's a group that was willing to push through the pain of old C++ 
and read books by Scott Meyers and learn template 
metaprogramming. The willingness to endure that torture weeded 
out all but the very best matches. Now there are improvements 
with C++11, C++14, and C++17, so *that group* getting a *much 
improved language* has no incentive to switch. Everyone else is 
already using another language.

"With C++xx, there's little benefit to switching" is a very 
common sentiment among current C++ programmers. And it's probably 
true. On the other hand, with a few exceptions, it's hard to see 
someone choosing to learn C++ rather than D. Making a push for 
those developers will be more productive.