C++20 is going to be some good shit.

>>61799615
Yeah, it will mostly add some things from Rust

>>61799615
C89 is all you'll ever need

>>61799615
>Lets add more shit to our turd

C++ is a fucking freak show.

give examples

Will we finally have modules?

>>61799615
Metaclasses have the potential to turn this into something so much worse than even perl.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

File: cool_pig.jpg (19KB, 506x425px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 506x425px

Ironically as C++ gets older and turns into even more of a clusterfuck (started around CPP 11) the case for plain C becomes even stronger

>>61800940
I disagree, the case for C++ became stronger with C++11. C++ just didn't offer enough over C before then.

>>61800686
I hardly doubt it'll pass through the committee. But who knows tho, we'll see.

>>61799615

> tfw still on C++11

>>61801459
You'll survive. Things could be a lot worse.

>>61800940

These features are all optional

>>61801459
C++14 doesn't add much so you can probably jump to 17 if you want

>Q: Why does "return {*this}" compile, but "return *this" doesn't?
>A: Because return actually means return an object of the function's return type initialized with list initializer
>source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45557407/c-this-inside-curly-braces

I hate C++ so very very much.

>>61800940
*ends up recoding c++ features with bugs into c
At least you feel like a hacker using C right?

>>61801776
That's perfectly reasonable behavior.

>>61801776
What the heck this is just move semantics you niggerfaggot, what are you complaining about.
If this is too hard for you then stop using c++

>>61801963
move semantics are irrelevant to this case

>>61799781
int i;
i = 0;
no ty

>>61799615
Are they finally getting rid of preprocessor junk and replacing it with modules?

C++ community has bunch of these do-gooders whose only job is to explain other people how c++ works. They are the cheerleaders, they write books, give talks on conferences and travel from company to company helping then unravel the mess c++ has created. They never solve real problems only problems which get created when somebody tries to solve a problem with c++. If you look at their history, they have spend last 25 years doing the same thing.
It's in their best interest too keep c++ as complicated as possible. It's what sells books and gets them invited to do company internal training sessions. Just like lawyers who draft over complex legislation and then get hired as consultants to private industry to deal with that legislation, for them the bureaucracy is what keeps the bread on the table.

>>61802662
wtf I hate C++ now

C++ has been irrelevant for years and it's not about to get any less so.

>>61800940
>the case for plain C becomes even stronger

I see Go picking up the majority of use cases, and Rust covering the remainders like hard-realtime applications where microseconds matter or cases that require a more advanced type system.

Both languages have great safety and performance characteristics and are marked improvements over C and C++.

>>61802095
Wrong. You have to do separate initialization only if the value isn't compile-time constant.
>inb4 for loops

Terry Davis says modern C++ is for niggers who are amazed by complexity.

>>61802662
On the other hand, C++ is one of the mainstream languages with better job security for developers. Once you write enough esoteric C++ for your company, you'll become irreplaceable, since no-one else will understand the mess you've made.

>>61803085
Nice arguments you got there, faggot.