2 ms·
If your goal is to help improve C++, sure, a shorter cycle time is better. If your goal is to use the language as a communication mechanism... having it change
by mehrdadn 7y ago
If your goal is to help improve C++, sure, a shorter cycle time is better. If your goal is to use the language as a communication mechanism... having it change constantly underneath you isn't helpful in my experience. And it's not necessary to release a new standard to let people try things out; you can let people play around with new features without iterating on them as formal standards.
- steveklabnik 7y ago“Change constantly” is too broad; there are different kinds of changes. Stability is paramount.
- mehrdadn 7y agoIf you find it too broad then just narrow it down in your mind. You won't be left with the null set.