C++ 17 is Done

For those who wants to know c++17 features<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;stackoverflow.com&#x2F;questions&#x2F;38060436&#x2F;what-are-the-new-features-in-c17" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;stackoverflow.com&#x2F;questions&#x2F;38060436&#x2F;what-are-the-new...</a><p>std::optional and std::any are one of the good things. std::apply and std::invoke can help you write better functional c++17 code.<p>Anyway thanks for C++17. For sometime, I thought I will learn Rust.

Boy... Would be a nice time to learn C++ again.<p>I mean modern C++, with all lessons learned, all revisions thus far assumed to be supported, officially and unofficially deprecated coding styles marked in helpful tidy little &quot;Don&#x27;t do this and this is why!&quot; red warning boxes. Bjarne Stroustrup himself said C++11... _11_ almost felt like a new language, and here we are already!<p>C++ is so big, and not only that, changing so much. I have a hard time catching up and a distilled &quot;sum of knowledge&quot; C++ programming language guide would be immensely helpful. C++17 including all its predecessors almost feel more like D at this point, soon enough only missing GC compared to that, which by itself have alternatives in modern C++ that some argue is even better.<p>I also think there&#x27;s a disconnect in how people perceive C++ today. Many seem to think of an archaic language, Quora questions &quot;Are C++ worthwile to learn today?&quot; abound... Another argument for a high visibility language guide being useful?<p>Documents like these are helpful but not very easy to digest: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;isocpp&#x2F;CppCoreGuidelines&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;CppCoreGuidelines.md" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;isocpp&#x2F;CppCoreGuidelines&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;CppC...</a>

As a matter of personal taste, I prefer big complex languages over simple ones<p>And I do consider, that some of the strongest criticism of C++, and that is, &quot;that most people use a subset of it, so it feels like many different languages glued into one&quot;, is actually a strength .. it means you can ignore some the complexity .. until you want it, or need it<p>I am very happy, that C++ is adding new features every 3 years .. and I do plan to invest more time in C++<p>Complexity is good

Every time there&#x27;s something that comes up for C++ I get excited, I&#x27;ve always wanted to use the language, but it&#x27;s like tap dancing in a mine field.<p>C++ needs a linter that rejects code that doesn&#x27;t meet a certain standard ala Rubocop.

I’m annoyed that the migration to “byte is uint8_t” from the “is a byte char or unsigned char?” mess is disrupted with std::byte.

Congratulations to everyone involved, pity we still haven&#x27;t got concepts and modules into it, but there is still hope for the next round. :)<p>Until of one the more secure alternatives gets more mainstream adoption, thus starting to be requested by our customers, C++ is going to be the tool to go to, when I need to step out of JVM and .NET languages to something more low level.

Is there any plan, anywhere, to try to provide a standard, modern subset of C++? Sort of like Perl and Javascript have strict mode.<p>Something that could be enforced by all the compilers.

&quot;Perhaps the most exciting thing was that we decided to add the std::byte type&quot;<p>So &quot;std::byte&quot; is not a character (&quot;std::char&quot;) nor arithmetic (&quot;std::int8_t&#x2F;uint8_t&quot;), but allows bitwise operations. It was really necessary? Anyone knows if that type allows defining the byte size in bits per instance?

Still no concepts unfortunately (or reflection). Bit disappointed really, I&#x27;m far from a guru but to me this seems like another &#x27;tick&#x27; upgrade where c++11 was a big &#x27;tock&#x27;, c++14 was mostly polish to c++11.

Dumb question: How popular is C++ as a systems programming language in 2017? Does anyone have data on the popularity of various languages (C, Rust, Go, etc.) when web and application development are excluded?

Lovely! But the real champagne opener is when certain mainstream compilers completely support all features.<p>PS. Please don&#x27;t forget to show some love for C2x now. :D

I&#x27;m just glad to see languages as old* as C++ evolve and continue to have improvements made. It&#x27;s a good time to be a programmer: our tools just keep getting better.<p>*Old but close to metal and fast and versatile.

I feel like we need some c+ not c++...

C++ is becoming Java.

It&#x27;s too late for C++ to regain popularity. C++17 features will become widespread in next 3-4 years (C++14 isn&#x27;t a common standard yet). Moreover, the language has become incredibly complicated and sadly doesn&#x27;t provide anything that would reflect modern needs.