[xamuel]

That is not a step toward simpler code. Under that proposal, people looking at your code will have to look up definitions of basic things that ought to be keywords---like "interface"---in order to reason about the code.

[jcelerier]

> Under that proposal, people looking at your code will have to look up definitions of basic things that ought to be keywords---like "interface"---in order to reason about the code.

That's a good thing: now you can refer to 20 lines of code instead of 15 pages of standardese to understand what happens.

[xamuel]

I can learn the 15 pages of standardese and it'll apply uniformly to every program. The 20 lines will contain some subtle surprise at the worst possible time.

[jcelerier]

> I can learn the 15 pages of standardese and it'll apply uniformly to every program.

That's assuming the compilers implementors had the same interpretation than you. With code, there is much less room for interpretation.

[nikbackm]

Not really a problem, if a "basic thing" is common enough you just put it into a library. Maybe even the C++ standard library.

The "interface" definition should probably qualify for that.