- "C++ proposal dismisses backward compatibility" - 10 Updates
- Donation - 1 Update
- Help needed - 1 Update
| Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com>: Apr 06 12:41PM -0500 "C++ proposal dismisses backward compatibility" https://www.infoworld.com/article/3535795/c-plus-plus-proposal-dismisses-backward-compatibility.html "Proposal to the C++ standards committee would give up backward and binary compatibility for safety and simplicity" Lynn |
| Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com>: Apr 06 06:13PM > https://www.infoworld.com/article/3535795/c-plus-plus-proposal-dismisses-backward-compatibility.html > "Proposal to the C++ standards committee would give up backward and > binary compatibility for safety and simplicity" Bad idea. C++ will be then like languages who break old code every now and then. Not for professionals... -- press any key to continue or any other to quit... U ničemu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec Svi smo svedoci - oko 3 godine intenzivne propagande je dovoljno da jedan narod poludi -- Zli Zec Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala |
| Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>: Apr 06 01:35PM -0500 Melzzzzz wrote: > > binary compatibility for safety and simplicity" > Bad idea. C++ will be then like languages who break old code every now > and then. Not for professionals... It's been heading that way for years. Safety and simpolicity are both good ideas, but if they *really* head down that path, they might as well define it strongly and give it a new name. C3? |
| alelvb <alelvb@inwind.it>: Apr 06 09:32PM +0200 Il 06/04/20 20:35, Ned Latham ha scritto: > Safety and simpolicity are both good ideas, but if they *really* head > down that path, they might as well define it strongly and give it a > new name. C3? I'd propose C³ - C cubed ; ) cheers |
| Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com>: Apr 06 07:41PM > Safety and simpolicity are both good ideas, but if they *really* head > down that path, they might as well define it strongly and give it a > new name. C3? Yes. C++ is used because of it's backwards compatibility. Changing code costs time and money... -- press any key to continue or any other to quit... U ničemu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec Svi smo svedoci - oko 3 godine intenzivne propagande je dovoljno da jedan narod poludi -- Zli Zec Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala |
| Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>: Apr 06 02:42PM -0500 alelvb wrote: > > down that path, they might as well define it strongly and give it a > > new name. C3? > I'd propose Cł - C cubed ; ) Good one. |
| alelvb <alelvb@inwind.it>: Apr 06 09:44PM +0200 Il 06/04/20 21:41, Melzzzzz ha scritto: >> new name. C3? > Yes. C++ is used because of it's backwards compatibility. Changing code > costs time and money... ...and the rewriting of many tools and libraries |
| Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Apr 06 08:33PM On Mon, 2020-04-06, Lynn McGuire wrote: > https://www.infoworld.com/article/3535795/c-plus-plus-proposal-dismisses-backward-compatibility.html > "Proposal to the C++ standards committee would give up backward and > binary compatibility for safety and simplicity" Most authors seem to be Google employees. I wonder how much of a serious suggestion it is, and how much it's a provocation intended to start a discussion on language goals. /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o . |
| "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com>: Apr 06 11:32PM +0200 On 06.04.2020 22:33, Jorgen Grahn wrote: > Most authors seem to be Google employees. I wonder how much of a > serious suggestion it is, and how much it's a provocation intended > to start a discussion on language goals. Have you considered an April Fool's joke, like Google's previous roman numerals proposal, or Bjarne's significant whitespace proposal? - Alf (who hasn't looked at that) |
| Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>: Apr 06 02:40PM -0700 > Have you considered an April Fool's joke, like Google's previous roman > numerals proposal, or Bjarne's significant whitespace proposal? > - Alf (who hasn't looked at that) No, the paper was published on March 2. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */ |
| kmnavabi@yahoo.com: Apr 06 07:00AM -0700 Today's TICKER posted if you donate to Leelanau Township Community Foundation, they will MATCH contributions for Leelanau Christian Neighbors. Click on the TICKER for more info and ways to donate. KERRY NAVABI # 40 |
| Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>: Apr 05 09:38PM -0500 James Kuyper wrote: > > Wrong. > OK - so you've made it clear that you're misunderstanding ordinary > English sentences. Wrong. > However, that's not a particular useful response, > because it lacks an explanation. It doesn't need one. > As a result, I have no idea which > misunderstanding of that sentence is the one you believe to be correct. That's because you don't understand English. > This is long overdue - Plonk. The action of a moral coward. |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment