On: Current Proposals for C++17

[GFK_of_xmaspast]

The last big change was c++11, and that was already five years ago.

[snuxoll → GFK_of_xmaspast]

Forgetting about C++14?

[msbarnett → snuxoll]

C++14 just cleaned up a couple of minor things from C++11. It was essentially intended to be a point release.

C++17 is the first "big" standard change since C++11. It will likely be followed by a small bug fix revision, analogous to C++14, a couple of years later.

[petra → msbarnett]

Wasn't a lot of memory safety and thread safety introduced in c++14?

[msbarnett → petra]

C++11 introduced threading and a memory model for C++.

C++14 had relaxed requirements on constexpr, initializers in lambda captures, using auto for return type deductions, and a few other small tweaks.

[danbolt → petra]

C++11 had unique_ptr and shared_ptr, but C++14 helped with adding make_unique. In my opinion, that makes a big difference because now making a special unique pointer is an atomic operation in your program.

[Kristine1975 → danbolt]

If only make_unique (and make_shared) worked with uniform initialization...

  struct Foo {
    int i;
    float f;
    bool b;

    // No constructor
  };

  std::make_unique<Foo>(1, 2.3f, true);

Doesn't compile, since make_unique requires an appropriate constructor (see https://isocpp.org/files/papers/n3588.txt for the rationale).

It also doesn't work when Foo's constructor is private, even when called from a function that would have access to this private constructor.

And this is my beef with C++: Yes it's powerful, and I quite like it, but you sooner or later hit these speed bumps that unnecessarily complicate things.

[GFK_of_xmaspast → snuxoll]

I don't consider c++14 to be a big change.