Pointless experiment

[smallB007]

Sorry to be that guy but the whole "experiment" with new c++ syntax is rather pointless.
We already have that: It is called Rust and does everything and more than cppfront2 is trying to poorly mimic and imitate.
Also, one of main selling points for rust like explicit lifetimes controlled by the compiler - this is simply not gonna happen in cpp. So basically Herb is trying to create/promote knock-off technology that is already outdated...

[JohelEGP]

Seems like a good issue to keep open. If it's pinned, there will be less duplicates. It also serves as a justification for closing duplicates.

As a reminder, there's an "Unsubscribe" button for this issue:

[Su5eD]

Experimenting is completely fine, I'm rather concerned about the non-free license

[JohelEGP]

Well, don't let that discussion get buried in this issue. Open it's own well-deserved one.

[JohelEGP]

The updated issue templates are a good barrier.

[suy]

Not to herb... Why I am not surprised...

Given the lack of quality of the "reported issue", I am not surprised.

Because comparing Rust with a new syntax for C++ and concluding that one is like the other but worse ("does everything and more than cppfront2 is trying to poorly mimic") is not even missing the point of compatibility, is being dishonest about the whole conversation about it. If you don't care about compatibility at all, and you think a clean break is good for you, great, go do that. But this code is about improving C++, not abandoning it.

[BenHanson]

Microsoft should simply hire Sean Baxter and get this project done.

I wish this cppfront all the success in the world, but so far it's looking like an open-source mosh pit to me.