> Even if 10% of people unhappy that’s too much
You realize this is an impossible standard, right? Literally impossible.
You realize this is an impossible standard, right? Literally impossible.
Same for Java, IIRC the only controversial decision they made was the introduction of modules.
Python 3 was a mistake, but generally Python users are happy with Python changes.
10% is not impossible. Even if this decision is ”right”, communication could be better: more options to play with different syntaxes, more time to get used to new syntax before stabilizing are just two possible ways to deal with the angry mob.
I believe you are mistaken. C++ community has a lot of diverse opinions about its features. As an old saying goes, it is possible to use only the good subset of C++ features, the problem is every shop has its own subset. Even about something as basic as exceptions there is no consensus. Similarly, not everybody is happy about the "modern C++" movement. I guess these people are just confident that thanks to serious commitment to backwards compatibility they will be able to continue writing code in their old grumpy ways so there is no need to loudly express their dissatisfaction.
Rust community is much less fractured (in part because it is smaller and younger) and there is a sense that decisions made today will determine how everybody will write Rust code tomorrow. Combine that with efforts to encourage an inclusive discussion and you get a lot of disagreement visible in discussions, especially concerning aspects that are prone to bikeshedding.
Coroutines were quite co_ntentious.
Maybe the difference is that very few C++ developers live on the bleeding edge. I don't use anything unless it's available from the default packages on an LTS release. So, I won't be using C++17 until I update to Ubuntu 20.04 later this year. And compared to the older developers in my lab, I'm an early adopter.
By the time new features reach the average C++ programmer, they're just how things are. The pain and the fighting of the standardization process is just distant memory that happened to somebody else.
If anything if 10% of C++ users are happy with the new features in a release it's a great success. I see a lot of complaining about the committee, its decisions, and its decision-making process.