10 ms·

Well, there is progress on all features, yet nothing is ready to go into C++17. So either we get no new standard at all, or we get a Standard without the large

Well, there is progress on all features, yet nothing is ready to go into C++17. So either we get no new standard at all, or we get a Standard without the large features. Also C++14 was a step forward, generic lambdas are a step forward (boost::hana is based on this, and brings though compile times down), I expect similar language features in C++17, that ease the programming and will bring new innovations to C++. Your boost argument is only valid for library features. Modules or concepts can never be a part of boost in the way they are in the TS.

netheril96 11y ago
> So either we get no new standard at all, or we get a Standard without the large features. No new standard then. The C++ compilers, standard libraries and the ecosystem have barely caught up with C++11, and C++ 17 was now on the horizon. If it doesn't bring much benefit, then it really cannot justify the compatibility nightmares. I for one will skip it. > Your boost argument is only valid for library features. That is exactly the point. Library features are not exciting as they can be implemented just fine and better by third parties. Therefore a C++ standard with only library features are hardly useful at all.
- nly 11y ago
  > The C++ compilers, standard libraries and the ecosystem have barely caught up with C++11 That's not really true. Both GCC and Clang have reached C++11 and C++14 feature-complete status very quickly.
  - netheril96 11y ago
    The latest versions, yes. But how many production system use the latest compilers?