Hi, Thanks... so it sounds like the main effort (aside from what you delicately called "professional development" ;-) ) will be to introduce features that improve robustness or performance when writing new code and possibly when maintaining (fixing, extending) existing code.
-P. On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Greg Landrum <greg.land...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Peter, > > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 7:55 PM, Peter S. Shenkin <shen...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, I read your posting on Medium, and would be curious to hear which of >> the many language features in c++11/14 you find most appealing. Is it that >> you hope to rewrite things using these features, or, at the other extreme, >> just want to make sure that the code remains compatible with new language >> standards? >> > The standards committee has been very careful and the changes they made do > not, to the best of my knowledge, break backwards compatibility (note: I'm > just talking about being able to compile code and have it work, binary > compatibility could be a different story, but that's less important). > > A big component of this is just being able to learn and use the new > features in the language. It's a professional development thing for anyone > working with the RDKit C++ code. > > Some of the changes (auto variables, range-based for loops, non-member > begin() and end()) will help simplify the code, which is a big win. > Others (unique pointers) will help with making things more explicit and, I > hope, result in some speed improvements. > And, the great unknown, move semantics could result in a nice performance > boost. But that we'll have to see. > > -greg > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Rdkit-discuss mailing list Rdkit-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rdkit-discuss
