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
