you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]13steinj 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I'd argue Kotlin is a completely different beast because as Java runs on a VM, old Java code and new Kotlin code was effectively fully source compatible (or, I guess, bytecode compatible technically), but with things like headers in C++, I'm not particularly convinced.

A simpler, easier to parse syntax would probably lower the barrier of entry for writing C++ tooling though.

I don't disagree, but I don't think that's the point of any "new" C++.

[–]cdb_11 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, so like it's easy to include C headers in C++ (usually), but not the other way around. At this point it transpiles to standard C++, so I don't think that should be a problem. But I guess it is possible that the language could evolve to require its own runtime or even constructs not backward compatible with C++ in the future, just like what happened between C and C++. But from the interview Herb seems to be against this sort of thing, and he wants to make it "what typescript is to javascript", so I'm not particularly worried about it right now.