8 ms·

This appears to be a out of season April Fool's joke. Am I the only one who thinks the this sacrifices the readability?

rfoo 2y ago
It may be done on purpose? To me this looks like a satirical piece in response to some "nooooo how dare you introduce lifetime annotations to C++"-style comments on the same author (Sean Baxter)'s C++ lifetime annotation proposal.
- devnull3 2y ago
  On the other hand its published on open-std.org which adds to its credibility
flohofwoe 2y ago
C++ isn't exactly famous for being readable to begin with. If the name Sean Baxter doesn't ring a bell, he's creating the Circle compiler which one step after another fixes the problems of C++ (while not trailing off into a completely new language): https://www.circle-lang.org/quickref.html https://www.circle-lang.org/quickref.html
- einpoklum 2y ago
  > which one step after another fixes the problems of C++ Somehow, multiple groups of people have recently decided they want to "fix the problem": Carbon, Circle, CppFront2. But apparently, it's different fixes, and the formulation of the "the problem" is different. I am wary of rushing to do this, considering the fate of the D, a previous attempt to "fix the problem" with C++.
  - flohofwoe 2y ago
    AFAIK the big difference of Circle to both Carbon and CppFront2 is that Circle is (mostly?) a superset of C++17, so it doesn't change the basic syntax, just adds things on top. I don't care much either way tbh, just watching from the sidelines while happily churning out C and Zig code ;) But IMHO Sean Baxter does more for C++ than the entire committee ever did in the last three decades - if C++ would have moved into a similar direction I probably wouldn't have dropped it as my main language).
  - fithisux 2y ago
    It fixed the problem with C++ and in an exceptional way. Now with @live, even when GC is on, they are ahead of Rust. I love it.
    - einpoklum 2y ago
      An annoying but rather valid quip by Bjarne Stroustrup is that "there are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about, and the ones nobody uses." D has, statistically, not been attactive enough for people to switch to it from C++. Perhaps this is unfortuante... ? I wouldn't mind a link to an argument in favor of switching to (today's) D from (today's) C++.
- account42 2y ago
  The examples in the proposal already look like a completely new language. And yes, one that is significantly less readable than C++.

rfoo 2y ago

It may be done on purpose? To me this looks like a satirical piece in response to some "nooooo how dare you introduce lifetime annotations to C++"-style comments on the same author (Sean Baxter)'s C++ lifetime annotation proposal.

devnull3 2y ago
On the other hand its published on open-std.org which adds to its credibility

flohofwoe 2y ago

C++ isn't exactly famous for being readable to begin with. If the name Sean Baxter doesn't ring a bell, he's creating the Circle compiler which one step after another fixes the problems of C++ (while not trailing off into a completely new language): https://www.circle-lang.org/quickref.html https://www.circle-lang.org/quickref.html

einpoklum 2y ago
> which one step after another fixes the problems of C++ Somehow, multiple groups of people have recently decided they want to "fix the problem": Carbon, Circle, CppFront2. But apparently, it's different fixes, and the formulation of the "the problem" is different. I am wary of rushing to do this, considering the fate of the D, a previous attempt to "fix the problem" with C++.
- flohofwoe 2y ago
  AFAIK the big difference of Circle to both Carbon and CppFront2 is that Circle is (mostly?) a superset of C++17, so it doesn't change the basic syntax, just adds things on top. I don't care much either way tbh, just watching from the sidelines while happily churning out C and Zig code ;) But IMHO Sean Baxter does more for C++ than the entire committee ever did in the last three decades - if C++ would have moved into a similar direction I probably wouldn't have dropped it as my main language).
- fithisux 2y ago
  It fixed the problem with C++ and in an exceptional way. Now with @live, even when GC is on, they are ahead of Rust. I love it.
  - einpoklum 2y ago
    An annoying but rather valid quip by Bjarne Stroustrup is that "there are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about, and the ones nobody uses." D has, statistically, not been attactive enough for people to switch to it from C++. Perhaps this is unfortuante... ? I wouldn't mind a link to an argument in favor of switching to (today's) D from (today's) C++.
account42 2y ago
The examples in the proposal already look like a completely new language. And yes, one that is significantly less readable than C++.