Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: We have a new standard!
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2024 14:51:17 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <vkrk4l$10d4e$1@dont-email.me>
References: <C++-20241227154547@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <cone.1735354270.316807.177566.1000@ripper.email-scan.com>
 <vkojb7$96o6$1@dont-email.me> <vkp50p$ce10$1@dont-email.me>
 <vkr4ve$sksr$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2024 14:51:18 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="42c2d5751f7fc0d51435db29cafdf071";
	logging-data="1062030"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19MTKQddvGRkM3LrtTQTBJtic6hGWbce5s="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:t8uneVPnY5wcx4/OzBvZHtoojWs=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vkr4ve$sksr$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3240

On 29/12/2024 10:32, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2024 16:20:57 +0100
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> gabbled:
>> On 28/12/2024 11:19, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> Being serious, I haven't even checked whats new in it but going by 
>>> C++ 2020
>>> it'll be yet more syntactic soup to support features absolutely no 
>>> one outside
>>> of ivory tower academic discussions asked for. It'll just add yet 
>>> morecomplexity to compilers, hence more potential bugs and make the 
>>> C++ learning
>>> curve even steeper meaning yet more new programmers abandon it - or 
>>> don't
>>> even start - for languages such as Python.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, yes - the classic well-reasoned argument.  Why would one ever want 
>> to /look/ at the new standard before condemning it?
> 
> Ah yes, the same logic that has produced cars with ever more, harder to use
> complexity that no one wants.

No, not remotely.  But then, you knew that before making what you 
mistakenly thought was a smart or witty reply.

If you don't like the complexity of newer C++ standards, that's fine. 
If you don't think it is a good direction for the language, fair enough. 
  You can choose a different language, or stick to an older standard, or 
make your own language, or get involved in the C++ standardisation 
processes and try to influence them.

You can have an informed opinion about C++, and agree or disagree with 
the opinions of the committee members.

But what you don't get to do - or at least, don't get to do if you want 
to be viewed seriously - is spout an /uninformed/ opinion.  That's no 
more than mindless prejudice, and of no interest to anyone.

So go away, and read about C++23.  Learn what is new or changed.  /Then/ 
you can come back and tell us what you don't like about it - or perhaps 
you'll find some things that you /do/ like about it.  Either way, you'll 
be at least vaguely qualified to express an opinion on it.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B23>