On 11/07/2024 14:04, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Fair enough. I seem to remember reading about this happening on /r/cpp,
> but I didn't save the link and can't find it anymore. I have toned down
> the sentence to "there may be reluctance to add new standard library
> classes ...". If you think this is still too strong, I'll remove the
> sentence entirely.
>
>
> I think "reluctance to evolve existing classes in incompatible ways"
> would be accurate. It's talking about adding new classes that I'm
> objecting to. That doesn't seem to match reality, as we keep adding more
> and more new things. Sometimes that happens precisely because of ABI
> reasons, like the jthread example. There was reluctance to change
> std::thread, so instead a new class was added. That doesn't seem
> consistent with "reluctance to add new standard library classes". If
> anything, we add too much, and ABI concerns increase that rather than
> decreasing it.

I've removed the sentence about new classes, and rephrased the other two
bullet points to indicate reluctance, rather than impossibility.


Hans Guijt