Jason Merrill wrote:
On 07/28/2009 10:47 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
We need a gcc branch for concepts.
Probably, if someone is working on them, just as for any ongoing project.
That leaves open the question of whether the ConceptGCC branch is the
one.
No. Doug felt that much of ConceptGCC needed to be rewritten; the
ConceptGCC branch is just a place to store the existing work for later
reference.
That effort did look dead. It seemed to me like a clean slate would be
nice.
One idea I had was to look at the metaprogramming pseudo concepts that
seem to be in the library already and beefing those up. Maybe that plus
a tiny amount of core language secret sauce would be the best approach
for concepts.
There is a cxx0x-concepts-branch, but no work has been done on it.
Probably when someone starts serious work on reimplementing concepts
we'll create a new branch. I don't currently have any plans to work
on concepts, as there are plenty of other things to work on that will
be in C++0x.
I agree. There's constexpr, lambdas, nullptr, etc.
Then there's library stuff like regex mostly.
I was thinking we'd have a lot of green check marks for most of C++-0x
when it finally comes out. I think other compilers will too. There
won't be hardly any latency at all between ratification and good and
broad support for C++-0x. That's nothing to sneeze at.
Jason
