|
|
|
|
|
by tw061023
315 days ago
|
|
Reframe it as "you can do precisely what you need by generating code" and there is your answer. Which is far better than to rely on a party which, as I said, has precisely nothing to do with what anyone needs. Which will inevitably produce solutions that can only partially (I am being generous here) be used in any particular situation. As for "possibly buggy" - look, I can whip up a solid *DL parser complete with a C++ code generator in what, a week? And then polish it from that. The committee will work for several years, settle on a barely working design, then it will take some years to land in major compilers, then it will turn out it is unusable because someone forgot a key API or it was unfeasible on VAX or something like that. And my build process is not complicated, and never will be. It can always accomodate another step. Mainly because I don't use CMake. |
|
We are at C++20 and I wouldn't like to work for a company that uses an earlier standard.