Herb Sutter is trying to save C++ from becoming a legacy language: https://github.com/hsutter/cppfront
It is his ongoing work as he presented it on CppCon today.
It is his ongoing work as he presented it on CppCon today.
Currently the positive part is that VC++ is the most compliant in ISO C++.
Note that other than the spaceship operator, all Herb's former proposals for reflection, exceptions and parameters have fizzled out at the committee, nothing happened after his CppCon talks.
Doesn't matter, because it was made public Herb Sutter's presented his own language as solution to fix C++ at this year's CppCon,
I think that C++ is moving towards becoming a legacy language (with a huge legacy of important codebases written and maintained in it), but it's not yet there. Rust and Go keep replacing it at different ends of spectrum though.
That's certainly a definition, but C++ would still not meet the definition of a legacy language by that measuring stick. C++ remains one of the most popular programming languages in the world in spite of the inception of alternatives. For instance, TIOBE (I know) lists C++ at the 4th place of it's popularity ranking, and features 4th place in GitHub's pull request ranking for 2022.
https://madnight.github.io/githut/#/pull_requests/2022/1
Also, we should keep in mind that C++ was basically the only relevant programming language available for some domains, such as Windows desktop development. Since then, Microsoft put its collective weight in C# to portray it as the one and true technology, and in the process pushed C++/CX and C++/WinRT as part of UWP, which aren't exactly C++. If one vendor changed its mind and decided to roll it's proprietary solutions as C++ competitors, that's hardly an issue with the merits of C++.
One thing that C++ does not have but some niche wannabe competitors have is teams of PR and evangelists selling the idea that a few loudmouths generating noise day and night represent a change in the baseline.
These search engines confuse C, C++ and C# all the time. So I'm sure there's some level of mutual inflation of rankings going on there, even if you accepted search results as a meaningful metric.
Similarly, I'd be a little suspect of the SQL variants rankings
The 0x era started around two decades ago, a few years after the release of C++98, and arguably ended over a decade ago with the release of C++11. This isn't something new.
> Now everyone seems miserable.
I don't see any misery. If anything, what I see is projects bounded to old C++ versions due to real-world constraints.
Ignoring inheritance and using templates, you can just make programs about simple data structures and loops. No hacks needed to work around garbage collection or excessive memory allocation, it's great.
Translating a modernized, possibly memory-safe version of C++ to standard C++ is definitely one such possibility, and it is great that someone who is as capable as Herb Sutter is working on it.
That's absolutely not true. I've seen plenty of new projects in C++ in the last month alone. A lot of the time when someone writes a binary wheel for python, it's in C++ for example. I'd ask for citation, but I can't imagine how someone would demonstrate a negative claim like this.
Carbon, on the other hand, is just Google code standard as a frontend. No exceptions, weird naming schemes etc. It's like a coding guideline made language. The guys behind it clearly know performance though, so I am not saying it won't be that. But will it be a great language? I don't think it can compete with what Herb Sutter is trying to achieve. I am of course willing to be proven wrong.
See: https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2019/p07...