4 ms·

Herb's CppFront looks like the best hope for a clean C++ future

by ape4 4y ago

varajelle 4y ago
CppFront is a different project entirely. It's like saying C++ is C's future
- Iamreadingthehn 4y ago
  CppFront compiles to C++ and everything is intended to map to clean usable C++ code so that if the project fails, the code is still salvageable in its C++ form. It's not intended as a separate language.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    I can do the same with Eiffel, so is Eiffel C++'s future?
    - chrsig 4y ago
      I think you're removing all context and constructing a false equivalency According to wikipedia, Eiffel was created in 1986, making it a contemporary with C++'s initial development. From what I can tell, it's creator had no affiliation with the development of C/C++, and it was created for reasons completely unrelated to C++. CppFront was created by the C++ committee chairman for the explicit goal of providing a path forward for C++. Herb explicitly stated that the inspiration for using C++ as a compilation target was taken from Bjarne's initial implementation of C++, which compiled to C.
      - pjmlp 4y ago
        Nope, I am making a point that plenty of languages have as goal to compile to C++, Eiffel was only an example from many others I could have chosen from. The way Herb Sutter tries to sell Cppfront, versus all those other languages that have backends capable of generating C++, is exactly that, as ISO C++ chairman he is trying to portray Cppfront isn't like the others, given his position. Hasn't as it is, he would use the same terms as the Carbon and Val folks.
  - varajelle 4y ago
    Exactly what C++ to C at the beginning https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cfront https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cfront
pjmlp 4y ago
If anything, Circle would be it. CppFront is just like Carbon and Val, with a completly different syntax, translating to C++ is just an implementation detail, he just markets in a different way given his position at ISO, most likely not to raise too many waves.
- xiphias2 4y ago
  Not really, we as a community know already that the best way to significantly change a language by keeping full compatibility is to write a preprocessor (CppFront way). Carbon is DOA as it hacks a compiler, and Circle isn't even in active development (again if it would compile to C++ that would be a better direction). At the same time putting ideas from Carbon to CppFront is possible (I wish Carbon developers would also think about going the preprocessing direction).
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    Circle is the only one that is in active development, and available today, need to improve your fact checking. https://twitter.com/seanbax https://twitter.com/seanbax CppFront is just like Carbon and Val, CppFront compiling to C++ is an implementation detail, C++ and Objective-C aren't C, just as CppFront isn't C++, regardless of the sales pitch.
chrsig 4y ago
I agree. C++ really should just be left as is an used as a compilation target for easy bootstrapping and interoperability.
WalterBright 4y ago
Herb is one of the best things that ever happened to C++. Not only is he wicked smart, but his ability to persuade is most impressive. As if he needed more, he's also a very nice gentleman.

Herb's CppFront looks like the best hope for a clean C++ future

by ape4 4y ago

Herb's CppFront looks like the best hope for a clean C++ future

varajelle 4y ago

CppFront is a different project entirely. It's like saying C++ is C's future

Iamreadingthehn 4y ago
CppFront compiles to C++ and everything is intended to map to clean usable C++ code so that if the project fails, the code is still salvageable in its C++ form. It's not intended as a separate language.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  I can do the same with Eiffel, so is Eiffel C++'s future?
  - chrsig 4y ago
    I think you're removing all context and constructing a false equivalency According to wikipedia, Eiffel was created in 1986, making it a contemporary with C++'s initial development. From what I can tell, it's creator had no affiliation with the development of C/C++, and it was created for reasons completely unrelated to C++. CppFront was created by the C++ committee chairman for the explicit goal of providing a path forward for C++. Herb explicitly stated that the inspiration for using C++ as a compilation target was taken from Bjarne's initial implementation of C++, which compiled to C.
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      Nope, I am making a point that plenty of languages have as goal to compile to C++, Eiffel was only an example from many others I could have chosen from. The way Herb Sutter tries to sell Cppfront, versus all those other languages that have backends capable of generating C++, is exactly that, as ISO C++ chairman he is trying to portray Cppfront isn't like the others, given his position. Hasn't as it is, he would use the same terms as the Carbon and Val folks.
- varajelle 4y ago
  Exactly what C++ to C at the beginning https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cfront https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cfront

pjmlp 4y ago

If anything, Circle would be it. CppFront is just like Carbon and Val, with a completly different syntax, translating to C++ is just an implementation detail, he just markets in a different way given his position at ISO, most likely not to raise too many waves.

xiphias2 4y ago
Not really, we as a community know already that the best way to significantly change a language by keeping full compatibility is to write a preprocessor (CppFront way). Carbon is DOA as it hacks a compiler, and Circle isn't even in active development (again if it would compile to C++ that would be a better direction). At the same time putting ideas from Carbon to CppFront is possible (I wish Carbon developers would also think about going the preprocessing direction).
- pjmlp 4y ago
  Circle is the only one that is in active development, and available today, need to improve your fact checking. https://twitter.com/seanbax https://twitter.com/seanbax CppFront is just like Carbon and Val, CppFront compiling to C++ is an implementation detail, C++ and Objective-C aren't C, just as CppFront isn't C++, regardless of the sales pitch.

chrsig 4y ago

I agree. C++ really should just be left as is an used as a compilation target for easy bootstrapping and interoperability.

WalterBright 4y ago

Herb is one of the best things that ever happened to C++. Not only is he wicked smart, but his ability to persuade is most impressive. As if he needed more, he's also a very nice gentleman.