Name: Anonymous 2015-06-10 7:28
TL;DR - Bignums, Concepts, Coroutines, Modules, Nested Namespace Definitions and more
So you already know about Concepts, it's essentially like Haskell's type system for C++ templates [1]. There's a lot of interest in coroutines, with a few different proposals [2]. There are two competing proposals for the Module System, one by Microsoft [3] and another by a small team of Clang developers at Google. Microsoft has released their proposal, and Google will be releasing theirs in the next couple of months. Nested namespace definitions [4] removes that ugly wart that has plagued Sepples code forever (now you can do
This is why Sepples will still be around 30 years, and languages like Rust and Swift won't stand the test of time.
It's because Sepples already has market capture and the standard's committee is not afraid to adopt competing programming idioms, albeit as slow as they sometimes are. But in the end, it's not about how quickly the language changes, but rather the momentum.
[1] http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Patrik_Jansson/publication/221241323_A_comparison_of_c_concepts_and_haskell_type_classes/links/004635190ab5d29e6b000000.pdf
[2] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/n4453
[3] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/n4465
[4] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4230.html
[5] https://botondballo.wordpress.com/2015/06/05/trip-report-c-standards-meeting-in-lenexa-may-2015/
[6] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4038.html
[7] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n3871.html
So you already know about Concepts, it's essentially like Haskell's type system for C++ templates [1]. There's a lot of interest in coroutines, with a few different proposals [2]. There are two competing proposals for the Module System, one by Microsoft [3] and another by a small team of Clang developers at Google. Microsoft has released their proposal, and Google will be releasing theirs in the next couple of months. Nested namespace definitions [4] removes that ugly wart that has plagued Sepples code forever (now you can do
namespace A::B::C { ... }). And then all of the TS libraries that just got standardized last week or will be standardized in a few months will likely be merged into the main language: filesystem library, networking library, parallel containers library, transactional memory library [5]. There are new libraries up for proposal: runtime reflection library, cairo graphics library, etc. There's also an update to the numerics library, with arbitrary precision arithmetic and decimal floating-point, among other things [6][7].This is why Sepples will still be around 30 years, and languages like Rust and Swift won't stand the test of time.
It's because Sepples already has market capture and the standard's committee is not afraid to adopt competing programming idioms, albeit as slow as they sometimes are. But in the end, it's not about how quickly the language changes, but rather the momentum.
[1] http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Patrik_Jansson/publication/221241323_A_comparison_of_c_concepts_and_haskell_type_classes/links/004635190ab5d29e6b000000.pdf
[2] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/n4453
[3] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/n4465
[4] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4230.html
[5] https://botondballo.wordpress.com/2015/06/05/trip-report-c-standards-meeting-in-lenexa-may-2015/
[6] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4038.html
[7] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n3871.html