3 ms·
Some examples on top of my mind: - export templates is the canonical one. - Universal references are a great feature in principle, but the way they are integr
by gpderetta 2y ago
Some examples on top of my mind:
- export templates is the canonical one.
- Universal references are a great feature in principle, but the way they are integrated in the language is far from ideal.
- Both features are great in isolation, but the interaction between initializer lists and aggregate initialization is a giant footgun.
- Coroutines are overly complex and still incomplete but I still have hope.
- Modules feel DOA so far.
- Unrestricted compile time evaluation is great, but the constexpr qualifier per se doesn't guarantee any useful property.
edit: overall I'm happy with the evolution of the language, but the standardization process has flaws
- pjmlp 2y agoModule are already being used by Office, and those of us that don't need to rely on GCC, don't hate CMake, can already enjoy using them. Which is what I have been using on my C++ hobby projects for the last two years, on work projects we are still on C++17 land anyway.