Re: [boost] [smart_ptr] Interest in the missing smart pointer (that can target the stack)

Subject: Re: [boost] [smart_ptr] Interest in the missing smart pointer (that can target the stack)
From: Noah (duneroadrunner_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-02-03 02:05:11

On 2/2/2016 6:36 PM, Emil Dotchevski wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Noah <duneroadrunner_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Noah, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48kP_Ssg2eY
>

Emil, yeah I actually saw this a while ago. It was good the second time 
'round too. Before C++11, I was so ready to dump C++ for a more modern 
language unencumbered by C++'s legacy baggage. The only problem is that 
every language that came along for some reason seemed to choose 
mandatory garbage collection at the expense of raii. I don't know what 
the state of D is these days, but at least initially they seemed to be 
embracing garbage collection as well. I just can't accept that 
non-deterministic garbage collection is the right answer. But since 
C++11, it seems C++ may now be powerful enough to provide modern 
alternatives to it's own problematic legacy language elements. And my 
library was an attempt to see if this was possible. And so far it seems 
to be.

 From slide 28 of his talk about why C++ is not going be fixed:

C++:
        - Too complicated to fix.
        - Too constrained by legacy code compatibility requirements.
        - <in bold> No real interest by user community or standardization 
committee.

It seems the only way anyone's going to be interested in adopting safer 
language elements is to market it as a brand new language :)