On: Comparisons in C++20

[notmuchserious]

A brand new language without backward compatibility would be nice. C+++

[wyldfire → notmuchserious]

Rust and D are pretty close to just that IMO.

BTW the new language standards do make backwards incompatible changes. C++17, for example, deletes several features which were deprecated.

And [1] is an egregious example.

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/a/620402/489590

[de_watcher → notmuchserious]

The whole point is to have backwards compatibility. It's just fascinating how they add or fix things without breaking the code.

Doing without backwards compatibility is easy: take Rust or D.

[Crinus → de_watcher]

> It's just fascinating how they add or fix things without breaking the code.

In the same way it is fascinating to watch a forest fire from afar.

[de_watcher → Crinus]

This hostility is tiring.

The ability to avoid rewriting is a practical thing.

[ThePadawan → notmuchserious]

Just in case you didn't know, the "adding +" part of your idea is what inspired the naming of C#. If you look at the #, it is supposed to represent two columns of two + each.

[ziotom78 → ThePadawan]

Nice! I never thought about this. I believed part of the reason they chose "C#" is because of musical terminology: "C#" means C-sharp, which is on a higher pitch than a plain "C".

[gpderetta → ziotom78]

You are correct I think, but the play on double plus was also considered.