Re: We have a new standard!

David Brown writes:

On 02/01/2025 15:07, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
>

Overloading << and >> was unnecessary and confusing.

>
Disagreed.  I really don't think it was problematic.  Nor did any of the  /many/ people who were involved in the design of C++.  Remember, the  language and library has always been discussed, prototyped, and tested by  lots of people before being released.

And none of those "lots of people" recognized the major clusterfark that was  dumped into C++98, in the form of throw specifiers, when they came about?
Let's see…: JDK 1.0 came out in 1996. I'm supposed to believe that not even  one of those "lots of people" were aware of Java; were aware that in Java  throw specifications were a part of, essentially, what C++ would call a  method signature, and enforced by the compiler; and that if any code path  fails to catch an exception it is ill-formed. And not /one/ of those people  had the obvious "hey, that's what C++ should do, too" epiphany?
And when everyone was dragged, kicking and screaming, into admitting that  throw specifications were a clusterfark, instead of fixing the mess it just  got handwaived away, leaving behind just a token "noexcept" keyword, and a  huge pile of code that now needs to be fixed, before it compiles again.