Re: Backward compatibility

Subject: Re: Backward compatibility
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-07-04 22:31:57

On 5 July 2018 at 00:08, Christian Henning <chhenning_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> > So far we were using the fact that GIL hasn't received updates in years
>> > as rationale for not caring much about backward compatibility.
>>
>> Yes
>>
>
> I think just the introduction of c++11 features like variadic templates
> will "dramatically" reduce the source code and I guess will change the API
> in some ways.

I'd suggest to open GitHub issue and point places that would benefit
from variadic templates and and give example of such change(s).
That would make it clearer to any potential takers and
archive the idea for future.

> Same goes for features already in gil like SFINAE which can
> be expressed better these days in c++17.

Prrr, hold your horses :-), we've just entered C++11.

I don't mind switching to C++14 or even C++17, but it should come with
clear rationale. BTW, Switch to C++11 was the easiest one, it's just
obvious and necessary at numerous levels.

I personally am not interested in re-writing GIL just for the sake of
using the latest & greatest C++, however exciting this idea may be.

Again, I'd be careful about aiming for re-design and re-implementation
- it may require new review or it may not, who knows. I don't know.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net