4 ms·
And odd bits of proposed C++17. Picking the low-hanging fruit, I imagine, based on their discussion of the difficulty in supporting other features. I'm waiting
by TillE 12y ago
And odd bits of proposed C++17. Picking the low-hanging fruit, I imagine, based on their discussion of the difficulty in supporting other features.
I'm waiting impatiently for expression SFINAE. I like the features of C++ that let you write dynamic-esque code that's evaluated at compile time. It enables little bits of cleverness that save you from large complicated solutions.
> outside the open source world
Which is quite large, considering that Clang and GCC are the standard compilers for just about every major non-Microsoft platform, including the mobile ones.
- pjmlp 12y ago> Which is quite large, considering that Clang and GCC are the standard compilers for just about every major non-Microsoft platform, including the mobile ones. I have worked with a few enterprise customers (Fortune 500) that only allowed the compilers from the respective OS vendors. And new versions required an approval process to be followed. There is more out there than just GNU/Linux, Mac OS X, *BSD and Android. Granted, this was around 10 years ago, but I doubt the situation changed at all in such environments.
- plorkyeran 12y agoThe C++17 bits are things proposed by people on the VC++ team, since verifying that something is actually implementable is an important part of writing a good proposal.
- StephanTLavavej 12y agoBy my count, none of VC 2015 RTM's C++17 features will have been proposed by MS. N3922 auto and N4086 trigraphs were proposed by Googlers. Same for another Core feature that might be checked in. In the Library, I just checked in void_t, invoke(), and trivially copyable reference_wrapper, none of which I proposed (or anyone else at MS). I did propose auto_ptr/etc.'s removal which was voted into C++17, but it's too late for me to remove that stuff from 2015 RTM.