C++0x Final Committee Draft Approved(herbsutter.wordpress.com)
herbsutter.wordpress.com
C++0x Final Committee Draft Approved
http://herbsutter.wordpress.com/2010/03/13/trip-report-march-2010-iso-c-standards-meeting/
2 comments
I think the most important change to C++ is the addition of a memory model and standard primitives for threading. In its current state, writing a truly thread-safe, portable program in C++ is nearly impossible.
Edit: For some detail on the subject, see Boehm's paper, "Threads cannot be implemented as a library." http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2004/HPL-2004-209.pdf [PDF]
Edit: For some detail on the subject, see Boehm's paper, "Threads cannot be implemented as a library." http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2004/HPL-2004-209.pdf [PDF]
Lots of us use and love C++ and lots of new things is still being written in C++ — it is not a legacy language.
C++98 introduced us to generic programming and C++0x continues along that path.
C++98 introduced us to generic programming and C++0x continues along that path.
Performance. Until someone rewrites the entire Haskell standard library to use unboxed primitives and that stream fusion voodoo then C++ sits alone at the intersection of performance, abstraction and usability.
Shouldn't it be C++xx?
C++0B
This is not backward-compatible. With C++98 that is.
Anyway, I still don't see the point of C++ anymore. Is C++0x just for making legacy C++ codebases slightly easier to maintain by adding a few features over C++ + Boost?