Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is diamond inheritance really part of that fabric? Diamond inheritance isn't a problem in C++ as each inheritance path is followed separately. A small price to pay to enjoy the power of multiple inheritance. And NULL? NULL is deprecated since C++ 11 in favor of nullptr. C++ is old and has only accumulated, never lost. You may want to have a look at the latest standards.
I don't think the usual criticisms of NULL are satisfied by it becoming slightly more type-safe.
The Design of C++ (1994) [video]
61–63 of 63 posts
Re: The Design of C++ (1994) [video]
#62The language may seem complex to some, but so does math. It is the single most powerful programming tool the world has ever known. Sure, it may be hard to see that it is beautiful, but that is so only because it is a product of both intelligent design and evolution. The language structure is extremely logical, and there is very little that could be changed in it without the danger of destroying its finely tuned fabri…
Let's bring up some technical details to see whether there is a deliberate thought process behind the evolution of C++. Recent versions of C++ have the auto keyword. It's a cool new feature grafted onto C++ from other languages and meant to make the programmer's life easier. It lets you avoid typing things like for (std::vector >::const_iterator it = v.begin(); it != v.end(); ++it) { foo(*it); } The above used to be…
As a light C programmer, no part of this post does not make me WTF hard. Would I actually be expected to type that cataclysm at the top? What's wrong with the C-style loop? Was 'auto' the best name they could come up with for this feature?
Re: The Design of C++ (1994) [video]
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's bring up some technical details to see whether there is a deliberate thought process behind the evolution of C++. Recent versions of C++ have the auto keyword. It's a cool new feature grafted onto C++ from other languages and meant to make the programmer's life easier. It lets you avoid typing things like for (std::vector >::const_iterator it = v.begin(); it != v.end(); ++it) { foo(*it); } The above used to be…
As a light C programmer, no part of this post does not make me WTF hard. Would I actually be expected to type that cataclysm at the top? What's wrong with the C-style loop? Was 'auto' the best name they could come up with for this feature?
They have chosen auto, because it was already a reserved keyword, but it was practically useless.