Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What will C++17 be?

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 86 posts

Re: What will C++17 be?

#11

Post by Someone »

zerr wrote: post #6
mike-cardwell wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

c++11 came in 2011. c++14 came in 2014. Seeing a pattern yet?

When we'll have a compiler support - this is what really matters, especially for those who use MSVC... It is 2015 and we still don't have a full C++11 support.

http://cpprocks.com/c1114-compiler-and-library-shootout/ disagrees:

"First, let’s look at the C++11 language features. Clang 3.3 and above, and GCC 4.8 and later have complete support, so there was no point including them in the table."

Also note that, on the C++14 front, clang supported all language features and most library features. And that is a year ago.

Re: What will C++17 be?

#14

Post by hendzen »

mike-cardwell wrote: post #8
zerr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we'll have a compiler support - this is what really matters, especially for those who use MSVC... It is 2015 and we still don't have a full C++11 support.

FWIW, Clang and GCC support all C++11 features.

Though GCC only gained full C++11 support as of 5.1, which was released this week.

Re: What will C++17 be?

#15

Post by moomin »

a13xb wrote: post #13
mike-cardwell wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

c++11 came in 2011. c++14 came in 2014. Seeing a pattern yet?

C++11 was originally known as C++0x, so C++17 may yet become C++19.

Yes, and C++17 is a big one, which may well slip, while C++14 was a small one, mostly aimed at cleaning up C++11.

Re: What will C++17 be?

#16

Post by zerr »

Someone wrote: post #11
zerr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we'll have a compiler support - this is what really matters, especially for those who use MSVC... It is 2015 and we still don't have a full C++11 support.

http://cpprocks.com/c1114-compiler-and-library-shootout/ disagrees: "First, let’s look at the C++11 language features. Clang 3.3 and above, and GCC 4.8 and later have complete support, so there was no point including them in the table." Also note that, on the C++14 front, clang supported all language features and most library features. And that is a year ago.

Yes, but I was talking about MSVC - MicroSoft Visual C++ compiler.

Re: What will C++17 be?

#18

Post by 1971genocide »

plq wrote: post #9
fishnchips wrote: post #3

How about making the language more accessible to newcomers by providing a sane default way of doing package management and builds. Go is a great example of both things done reasonably well out of the box.

From where I'm standing, C++ package management is already quite nicely solved by what we call package managers in the linux world. You know, portage, aptitude, etc.

Linux is used by 1% of all computer users on the planet.

Trying to program C++ in windows is an horrible experience that I wont wish on my worst enemy.

Linux is nice, but it doesn't have after effects, support for the latest ultrabooks, photoshop ( sorry GIMP is a joke ).

Linux also contantly breaks whenever I tried using it, sound, video ?

Also gaming.

Anyway the browser environment is cool because it forced everyone to stick to a single standard.

( Also corporate uses windows, sadly. Working with tools created by major corporations in my industry is on windows )

Re: What will C++17 be?

#19

Post by ris »

fishnchips wrote: post #3

How about making the language more accessible to newcomers by providing a sane default way of doing package management and builds. Go is a great example of both things done reasonably well out of the box.

Ugh. Language-based package managers are one of the biggest misfeatures of the millenium. They're all well and good* until they have to interact with the world outside their language universe.

* I'm being very generous here.

Post reply on HN