[jokoon]

Someone on reddit said that the cpp2 repo was a bit old, and that is true, although he may have started this as an experiment influenced by typescript and left it on the side at some times.

Anyway I have no idea if cpp2 would get support from microsoft or other devs, but cpp2 seems like the most humble and "least risky" solution for the future of C++, and I really want it to be.

What I remember the most that Herb Sutter said in his cpp2 talk, is that it aims to avoid 95% of bad coding practices that C++ allows today.

It's safe to say that beyond the valid criticism of C++, that it quite a good goal and it would improve C++, without using a new language, and that's good, because a new language causes problems: new toolchains, new semantics, new specifics, no experience on a new language.

Cpp2 is not a new language, it is the same semantics of C++, except it has a new syntax and enforces good practices.

One very interesting point: in the future, cpp2 allows a cpp2-only compiler to be born, and it would still live next to C++ binaries without problem. That cpp2 compiler might probably be much faster since the cpp2 is a smaller stricter subset.

[maxloh]

How about Google's Carbon language?

https://github.com/carbon-language/carbon-lang

[joshkel]

Carbon and Cpp2 are both "C++ successors," broadly speaking. However, they take different approaches in their design:

Carbon is a brand-new language that's designed to have seamless interoperability to C++.

Cpp2 is C++, just with a different syntax. (The goal is to even be able to mix Cpp2 and C++ syntax in the same source file. The initial implementation transpiles Cpp2 to C++ source code, similar to how the original C++ implementation transpiled C++ to C, rather than implementing a full compiler.)

Their overall goals appear to be different, too: The Carbon README states, "Existing modern languages already provide an excellent developer experience: Go, Swift, Kotlin, Rust, and many more. Developers that can use one of these existing languages should." With that mindset, it sounds like more of a stopgap for projects already invested in C++. In contrast, I believe that Sutter would argue that C++ still has the potential to be a viable choice for many tasks, and Cpp2 is a way to realize that.

[pjmlp]

> Cpp2 is C++, just with a different syntax.

Not really, that is like telling CFront or Objective-C (Stepstone days) were C with a different syntax.

[gumby]

> Anyway I have no idea if cpp2 would get support from microsoft or other devs…

Doesn’t he work for Microsoft?

[dgellow]

Yes but it’s his own personal project

[petre]

> Anyway I have no idea if cpp2 would get support from microsoft or other devs, but cpp2 seems like the most humble and "least risky" solution for the future of C++, and I really want it to be.

That ship has sailed. They already have C#.

[qalmakka]

To be fair C# is vastly different in terms of semantics compared to C++. There's a lot of areas where it's not viable to use C#, and IMHO it also has its own share of legacy and bad decisions from its "Java clone" days that make it impossible to prefer it to C++ sometimes.

Btw Microsoft is definitely interested into adopting new languages, just look all the effort they've been pouring into Rust lately.

[pjmlp]

Rust is now the official system programming language for Azure infrastructure, alongside managed languages, and it appears there is a soft spot to use Go instead of C#, when looking at what Azure opens up.

WinDev, Office and XBox is another matter, they are deep into C++ and COM culture.

[flohofwoe]

C# is so old by now, if it would be a good replacement for C++ at MS, it would already have replaced it.

[pjmlp]

Don't mix technology with the internal politics at Microsoft, where some business units won't use anything else besides COM and C++, no matter what.

They are so strong that they were responsible pushing the whole company into the whole Windows 8 debacle with WinRT, where COM was supposed to finally replace .NET.

https://arstechnica.com/features/2012/10/windows-8-and-winrt...

[barrenko]

Java and C# are in their "let's get functional" phase.

[neonsunset]

:(

C# has been at that for more than a decade and a half already. Java's arrival to the party is extremely late and still lacking in many areas.

[pjmlp]

C# could have been like D back in 2001, yet it had to wait to go open source, away from the wings from WinDev politics, having to provide a replacement to C++/CLI capabilities in a cross-platform way, to finally expose the full CLR to C#, without us having to routinely manually generate MSIL or reach out to C++/CLI.

Singularity and Midori were hardly taken seriously in any form by WinDev.