I think it's relevant to our recent discussion on versioning, and also for its considerations on language design.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=raB_289NxBk

P.S. Destruction comes at https://youtu.be/raB_289NxBk?t=4727 :o)

On Monday, 1 November 2021 at 00:20:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> I think it's relevant to our recent discussion on versioning, and also for its considerations on language design.
>
> https://youtube.com/watch?v=raB_289NxBk
>
> P.S. Destruction comes at https://youtu.be/raB_289NxBk?t=4727 :o)

Agreed on the destruction. But very good content by herb as usual nevertheless.

I'm not sure in what way does that meshes with versioning. Could you unpack that for me?

On 10/31/21 8:46 PM, deadalnix wrote:
> On Monday, 1 November 2021 at 00:20:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> I think it's relevant to our recent discussion on versioning, and also for its considerations on language design.
>>
>> https://youtube.com/watch?v=raB_289NxBk
>>
>> P.S. Destruction comes at https://youtu.be/raB_289NxBk?t=4727 :o)
> 
> Agreed on the destruction. But very good content by herb as usual nevertheless.
> 
> I'm not sure in what way does that meshes with versioning. Could you unpack that for me?

"Simplify C++ by adding to it" is the top-level message. It's a gambit.

On Monday, 1 November 2021 at 00:20:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> I think it's relevant to our recent discussion on versioning, and also for its considerations on language design.
>
> https://youtube.com/watch?v=raB_289NxBk
>
> P.S. Destruction comes at https://youtu.be/raB_289NxBk?t=4727 :o)

What? Pattern matching doesn't scale/nest well because you think it's like try-catch? That's major news to all C#, F#, ML, Ocaml, Rust, Swift, Elixir programmers...

On Monday, 1 November 2021 at 00:20:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> I think it's relevant to our recent discussion on versioning, and also for its considerations on language design.
>
> https://youtube.com/watch?v=raB_289NxBk
>
> P.S. Destruction comes at https://youtu.be/raB_289NxBk?t=4727 :o)

Why is it that always when I see Herb Sutter talk about C++, that long lost love for C++ suddenly re-emerges from the deep hurt past relationship...

On 2021-11-01 9:23, Arjan wrote:
> On Monday, 1 November 2021 at 00:20:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> I think it's relevant to our recent discussion on versioning, and also for its considerations on language design.
>>
>> https://youtube.com/watch?v=raB_289NxBk
>>
>> P.S. Destruction comes at https://youtu.be/raB_289NxBk?t=4727 :o)
> 
> Why is it that always when I see Herb Sutter talk about C++, that long lost love for C++ suddenly re-emerges from the deep hurt past relationship...

Maybe because he's just the best technical speaker ever.

On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 01:23:45PM +0000, Arjan via Digitalmars-d wrote: [...]
> Why is it that always when I see Herb Sutter talk about C++, that long lost love for C++ suddenly re-emerges from the deep hurt past relationship...

It's like an abusive relationship that you can never break free of. ;-) Me -- I call it quits on C++, clean break, no phone calls, no texts, no further contact, no shared assets. Been livin' happily ever after since. :-P

Well, OK, not entirely no further contact, sometimes work obliges me to work with C++ again. But only on the rare occasion. I mostly work only with C these days, and for that I'm happy -- in spite of C's fundamental flaws, it's still a smaller, cleaner language than the mess that C++ is.


T

-- 
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. -- Napoleon Bonaparte

On Monday, 1 November 2021 at 01:47:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 10/31/21 8:46 PM, deadalnix wrote:
>> On Monday, 1 November 2021 at 00:20:33 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> I think it's relevant to our recent discussion on versioning, and also for its considerations on language design.
>>>
>>> https://youtube.com/watch?v=raB_289NxBk
>>>
>>> P.S. Destruction comes at https://youtu.be/raB_289NxBk?t=4727 :o)
>> 
>> Agreed on the destruction. But very good content by herb as usual nevertheless.
>> 
>> I'm not sure in what way does that meshes with versioning. Could you unpack that for me?
>
> "Simplify C++ by adding to it" is the top-level message. It's a gambit.

Ok I can see that. On that front, I'd like to point at this specific timestamp: https://youtu.be/raB_289NxBk?t=2775

This part IMO, point at what the #1 problem with the way things have been done in D. D's feature just don't compose well because they aren't orthogonal with each other (and many are inconsistent).

C++ used to be very much that way too, and but it is clear that this is something that has changed with C++11 onward.