[rwj]

Backwards compatibility is holding the evolution of C and C++ back. Design improvements can't get approved if they affect ABI. Many of those improvements affect performance. The ecosystem needs a way to move forward without breaking ABI.

[properparity]

C++ shouldn't be a problem? Just add a new namespace:

std::move_fast_and_break_things::vector

Or maybe the other way around so you can keep using std::vector: move_fast_and_break_things::std::vector

Then you can add a 'using namespace move_fast_and_break_things;' at the top of your files if you know you don't care about the ABI in your program.

[brandmeyer]

You can do that with boost:: or absl:: right now. No need to involve the standards committee at all.

[noobermin]

This doesn't just apply to stl, this also means breaking boost or w/e and you're stuck with the same problem, users are mad and pitted against library writers.

[brandmeyer]

Boost doesn't even have a stable API commitment, let alone a stable ABI. Every release may require involvement from users to keep up to date.

Abseil doesn't even have releases any more. They expect you to live at head like GOOG does internally.

[vlovich123]

In c++ you do this with inline namespaces (change the default inline namespace version, keep the old one around, everything continues to work correctly in theory).

[noobermin]

It's not just new and breaking things, it also applies to fixing bugs.

[ninkendo]

I guess I’ll have to take your word for it… this article has failed to make that case IMO.