On 2022-11-25 at 05:59, Mehmet Kayaalp via Std-Proposals wrote:
> Preserving the old syntax without sacrificing the new (or Letting
> evolution runs its course freely)
>
> It is claimed that “100% syntax backward compatibility”
> [https://youtu.be/ELeZAKCN4tY <https://youtu.be/ELeZAKCN4tY>] is one of
> the major reasons against the progress of drastically simplifying
> syntax. The worth of C++ would not be the same if we ignore the entire
> evolution of C++ and the richness of existing libraries, which no one
> could rewrite in a brand-new syntax. In a natural evolution, the process
> involves not only the addition of new, worthy features to the gene pool
> but also the elimination of the old and nasty features from it.

Why do we have to "eliminate" the old features? Just stop using them!

You are not going to reuse old syntax with new meaning, are you? That
would be totally confusing.

> No one
> claims that if we write a new (C++) language from scratch with all that
> we know now but without the baggage of not-so-worthy features that are
> everywhere in great libraries, the syntax would be so complex.

Never heard about Carbon?