5 ms·
You don’t have to rewrite anything. C++ keeps backward compatibility. You don’t have to make it sound like it’s the case, and you don’t have to shame the "moder
by qsdf38100 4y ago
You don’t have to rewrite anything. C++ keeps backward compatibility. You don’t have to make it sound like it’s the case, and you don’t have to shame the "modern c++ crowd" over that false claim. That’s just uncalled for, unconstructive and partisan discourse. I expect better from HN.
- jnwatson 4y agoDid you see the original post? Lots of code changes were required for Chrome. That’s not backwards compatible.
- qsdf38100 4y agoIt’s 99.9% backward compatible. The comment makes it sound like it’s a huge pain every 2 years, as if it was the "python 2 to 3" level of pain. I went through a lot of these new versions, starting with c++11, and can’t remember one time I had to change anything to my code based, appart from silencing deprecation warnings for unicode stuff. Now I get that chromium-like code bases are huge and that the 0.1% of backward incompatibility is still a pain. Now, with that level of hugeness of code bases, maintaining it when the language evolves is going to be a pain. C++ has been very careful with backward compat, breaking very few things, compared to other languages. So these criticisms really are uncalled for to me. Sounds like good ol c++ bashing trying to sound wise. I felt the comment wasn’t fair and wasn’t an honest criticism. Sorry for my angry comment. We live in rough times.
- jnwatson 4y agoI've done several Python 2->3 transitions, and the amount of effort looks to be in the same order of magnitude described in the post.