Reply to post: Re: Direction number one

C++ Daddy Bjarne Stroustrup outlines directions for v17

John Savard

Re: Direction number one

This is an argument for putting "the modern stuff like functional programming constructs" in some new language, and not trying to graft it on to C++. It is not an argument for abandoning a language which is still very useful. Of course, if that "modern stuff" becomes so important that interest in C++ declines, then one can talk about "maintenance mode" - but at the moment, languages which produce efficient executables without the overhead of runtime type checking are still very much needed.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon