> And, why should I learn C++14 when C++17/18/19 will be another different language?
While it is indeed a pain to look at source code and understand the differences, the C++ standard gets very few releases than say Python or Ruby, and I doubt anyone can list all the differences between language versions without searching for them.
> No, I'd rather put in the effort to make Rust usable. The C++ ship has sailed.
Me too, but when it comes to what customers allow me to use, it is C++.
Sony and BMW are just now migrating to C++11 (not C++14, C++17, ...), how many years do you think it will take for something else to reach similar scale?
Which is why I am supportive of all attempts to improve the overall quality of C++, even C (UNIX variants are not going away) for that matter.
Rust still needs to improve a few things, which are anyway part of the 2017 roadmap, before Sony, BMW, Apple, Microsoft, IBM and similar companies decide to go Rust instead of C++yz or Swift.
While it is indeed a pain to look at source code and understand the differences, the C++ standard gets very few releases than say Python or Ruby, and I doubt anyone can list all the differences between language versions without searching for them.
> No, I'd rather put in the effort to make Rust usable. The C++ ship has sailed.
Me too, but when it comes to what customers allow me to use, it is C++.
Sony and BMW are just now migrating to C++11 (not C++14, C++17, ...), how many years do you think it will take for something else to reach similar scale?
Which is why I am supportive of all attempts to improve the overall quality of C++, even C (UNIX variants are not going away) for that matter.
Rust still needs to improve a few things, which are anyway part of the 2017 roadmap, before Sony, BMW, Apple, Microsoft, IBM and similar companies decide to go Rust instead of C++yz or Swift.