Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clang Is Already Working On "Highly Experimental" C++1z Support

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Clang Is Already Working On "Highly Experimental" C++1z Support

    Phoronix: Clang Is Already Working On "Highly Experimental" C++1z Support

    With LLVM developers already having lots of C++1y / C++14 support implemented, they have begun working on "highly experimental" support for C++1z -- the next major revision to the C++ programming language anticipated for release in 2017...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTcyNzg

  • #2
    Wow, I wasn't even aware of digraphs and trigraphs. They should just be abolished immediately. Any old code can be upgraded in seconds with a search+replace anyway.

    The terse for-range loops seems like an alright idea, but hardly a game changer. I've just gone over a rather large codebase and upgraded to for-range loops, and I think i'd prefer being explicit about the r-values. Looks strange if there is no type declaration (not even an auto), so I'm not convinced about it.


    The big question is.. when do we get modules?!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Micket View Post
      The big question is.. when do we get modules?!
      Good joke .. probably never. Take a look at D(lang) and if it is only just for fun

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by pythoneer View Post
        Good joke .. probably never. Take a look at D(lang) and if it is only just for fun
        Yeah... But they got a garbage collector, enjoy random thread lock and goodbye to pointer arithmetic

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gufide View Post
          Yeah... But they got a garbage collector, enjoy random thread lock and goodbye to pointer arithmetic
          i would if i could but sadly enough I've disabled the garbage collector, so i can't enjoy that features

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Micket View Post
            Wow, I wasn't even aware of digraphs and trigraphs. They should just be abolished immediately. Any old code can be upgraded in seconds with a search+replace anyway.

            The terse for-range loops seems like an alright idea, but hardly a game changer. I've just gone over a rather large codebase and upgraded to for-range loops, and I think i'd prefer being explicit about the r-values. Looks strange if there is no type declaration (not even an auto), so I'm not convinced about it.

            The big question is.. when do we get modules?!
            It's said to come with the next version, it least Herb Sutter has talked openly about it, and that they are working on it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Micket View Post
              Wow, I wasn't even aware of digraphs and trigraphs. They should just be abolished immediately. Any old code can be upgraded in seconds with a search+replace anyway.

              The terse for-range loops seems like an alright idea, but hardly a game changer. I've just gone over a rather large codebase and upgraded to for-range loops, and I think i'd prefer being explicit about the r-values. Looks strange if there is no type declaration (not even an auto), so I'm not convinced about it.


              The big question is.. when do we get modules?!
              Really? You don't either know Set Theory via Discrete Mathematics or don't care. They are used for machine language instruction mnemonics, amongst other mathematical uses.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
                Really? You don't either know Set Theory via Discrete Mathematics or don't care. They are used for machine language instruction mnemonics, amongst other mathematical uses.
                I have two comments on that
                Firstly: Well, I though it was clear from the context that I was talking about trigraphs in C++ (as they have nothing to do with graphs in mathematics at all), as in "I wasn't even aware of digraphs and trigraphs in C/C++".

                Secondly: You actually assume people know set theory and machine language?
                I mean, I actually happen to be quite familar with discrete mathematics, and have a very slight familiarity with assembly, but I certainly wouldn't expect that of anyone and I think you'll go through life disappointed in a lot of people by setting the bar that high.

                But to answer your first question: Yes, really.
                I've never had a math professor ever use the term "trigraph" when referring to any type of graph. Directed graph, sure, but digraph? Sure wasn't common terminalogy back when i took courses that covered graphs (e.g. finite automatas, markov chains, dijkstra's algorithm).
                And when is "digraph/trigraph" used set theory?!
                Using the term even in machine language doesn't seem to ever occur either. At least rare enough that there isn't a single mention on wikipedia on either machine language or assembly pages.
                Also, as far as I can tell from wikipedia, "trigraph" (and digraphs in this context) has nothing to do with graphs, but rather a greek translation of "write", so there are no connections to mathematics here?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
                  Really? You don't either know Set Theory via Discrete Mathematics or don't care. They are used for machine language instruction mnemonics, amongst other mathematical uses.
                  What does "Set Theory via Discrete Mathematics" mean?

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X