It is true that my lisp 1.5, maclisp, lisp360, VMLisp, Interlisp, and Symbolics code need rewrites to run but that code predates the Common Lisp standard. There

It is true that my lisp 1.5, maclisp, lisp360, VMLisp, Interlisp, and Symbolics code need rewrites to run but that code predates the Common Lisp standard. There are things I'd like to see in Common Lisp but not enough to require a new standard. If there is ever a new standards effort it should start by absolutely, positively REQUIRING that ALL code compliant with the prior standard MUST work unchanged under the new standard. The new C++ features like 'auto' simplify life in new code, which should not have been complicated in the first place. Where life gets ugly is with existing code written years ago. My C++ legacy code regularly breaks. gcc seems to default to C++11 but g++ uses C++14 by default. Breaking 'inline' behavior is just wrong. It seems that the Boost library is partially broken, apparently due to compiler implementation issues. Stop-gap measures, like compiler flags, just make the pain all that more intense. I'd be quite happy if the standards committee decided to create new languages (e.g. C11, C14, C17, etc) so it would be possible to say "I use C11". As it now stands I don't believe ANYONE who says they "know" C++. Are you up to speed on "concepts"? Even Stroustrop described the last "standard" as "a totally new language".