r/cpp • u/we_are_mammals • 8d ago

cpp2 (cppfront) is over?

I haven't used cpp2 (cppfront) much, but I like the idea of it: consistent syntax, consistency of meta-programming (which is done in C++ too, I believe). Herb Sutter presented cpp2 (cppfront) as an experiment. He did not encourage other people to bet on it, exactly. And there hasn't been much activity since 2022. Is the experiment over?

EDIT: Herb's answer is buried deep in the comment section: https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/1uxkglj/comment/oy06cxw/

65 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

112 comments sorted by

View all comments

32

u/javascript 7d ago

It confuses me why the mods allow discussion of Cpp2 and disallow discussion of Carbon

43

u/friedkeenan 7d ago

If I were to speculate the reasoning, then I would probably say it's because Herb's cppfront is intended to feed back into C++ and serve as a reference for proposals to C++, whereas Carbon is instead going off and doing its own thing, which doesn't really make it so different from other programming languages like Zig or Rust or whatever.

-2

u/pjmlp 7d ago

Except never were any paper out of it, other than author's relation to WG21 versus everyone else.

11

u/friedkeenan 7d ago

Herb's metaclasses paper uses cppfront as a reference implementation and investigation of what sorts out of metaclasses might be useful. He also employs cppfront for his UFCS paper in a similar manner.

-4

u/pjmlp 7d ago

Neither of them are proposals to specific ISO C++ versions.

6

u/friedkeenan 7d ago

You do realize that that is moving the goalposts and as well has little to do with the intention of cppfront, right? Or am I wrong in understanding "proposals to specific ISO C++ versions" to mean "proposals which were accepted to the C++ standard"?

-5

u/pjmlp 7d ago

None at all, those papers have zero value to C++ language improvements, as they were never submitted to voting.

They have as much value to ISO C++ as papers produced by a random dude on Reddit, and I am willing to bet none of that will ever appear in ISO C++.

5

u/friedkeenan 7d ago

Ok, man. I'm not going to get into a discussion vortex with you where we just waste each other's time, but I have to think that you realize that my saying "cppfront is intended to feed back into C++ and serve as a reference for proposals to C++" is not at all contradicted by Herb's proposals using it not yet being accepted into the standard. And that your saying "never were any paper out of it" is contradicted by there being... papers out of it.

I do have to admit too that I'm somewhat surprised by your spurning cppfront being used as references for proposals, when you at other times appear eager to deride the committee for accepting proposals which did not come with a reference implementation. Seems like Herb using cppfront as a reference implementation for his proposals would align with your desires for the proposal process, but maybe I'm missing something.

-2

u/pjmlp 7d ago

Except those papers never became proper proposals.

You would be right if cpp2 experiment actually turned into proper mailing papers submitted for voting into a specific ISO C++ version.

Which they never did and most likely never will.

They stayed into the realm of "look at this cool idea", right then what?