so tldr, the C haters have won in the process of rubyizing C++ for webdevs who literally could not care less about a language that they have absolutely no use for... I'm glad I decided against moving to C++
Look at the date on the article...
Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
31–40 of 84 posts
Re: Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
#32The fact that this headline cannot be distinguished from April Fools joke by other commenters seems to say a lot about the direction in which C++ standard committee is heading.
It’s not like the idea is completely crazy; pointer misuse is a big source of all kinds of problems, Rust shows how much can be done without constantly using raw pointers, and what are the C++ Core Guidelines if not an effort in exactly this direction? I finally “got” that this is a joke when they discussed the future alternatives: > For copyable and assignable references you can use std::reference_wrapper. ( http://…
1. April joke :)
The point of c/c++ in comparision to other languages is that you can do anything and having a huge toolbox for that. Pointers are excelent sledgehammer. You can be perfectly fine with not using them but c++ need to have them. The pointers are not source of the problem, the developer is. That's why languages like java are prospering, it prevent incompetent people making stupid mistakes and that is fine. But some people need and want freedom that c++ offers.
Re: Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not like the idea is completely crazy; pointer misuse is a big source of all kinds of problems, Rust shows how much can be done without constantly using raw pointers, and what are the C++ Core Guidelines if not an effort in exactly this direction? I finally “got” that this is a joke when they discussed the future alternatives: > For copyable and assignable references you can use std::reference_wrapper. ( http://…
1. April joke :) The point of c/c++ in comparision to other languages is that you can do anything and having a huge toolbox for that. Pointers are excelent sledgehammer. You can be perfectly fine with not using them but c++ need to have them. The pointers are not source of the problem, the developer is. That's why languages like java are prospering, it prevent incompetent people making stupid mistakes and that is fin…
Raw pointers are like "transporter scalpel" used by star trek doctors. When used with care it does the job and does it well.
You need plenty of tests and valgrind.
Its dangerous for most programmers to be cavalier with owning raw pointers. If we aren't we'll get another Java.
Re: Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
#34Re: Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
#35The fact that this headline cannot be distinguished from April Fools joke by other commenters seems to say a lot about the direction in which C++ standard committee is heading.
It’s not like the idea is completely crazy; pointer misuse is a big source of all kinds of problems, Rust shows how much can be done without constantly using raw pointers, and what are the C++ Core Guidelines if not an effort in exactly this direction? I finally “got” that this is a joke when they discussed the future alternatives: > For copyable and assignable references you can use std::reference_wrapper. ( http://…
In all seriousness, reference_wrapper lets you:
1. Have a container of non-null references. As the example in your cppreference link shows, that’s convenient for efficiently providing multiple “views” of the same values.
2. Pass a value with reference semantics to a function that takes an argument by value. Mainly useful to avoid copying or reuse a function object.
3. Explicitly say “this is a reference to something I don’t own”, complementing unique_ptr’s “reference to something I own exclusively”, shared_ptr’s “reference to something I share ownership of”, and raw pointers’ “reference to something I may or may not own”.
Re: Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
#36The fact that this headline cannot be distinguished from April Fools joke by other commenters seems to say a lot about the direction in which C++ standard committee is heading.
It’s not like the idea is completely crazy; pointer misuse is a big source of all kinds of problems, Rust shows how much can be done without constantly using raw pointers, and what are the C++ Core Guidelines if not an effort in exactly this direction? I finally “got” that this is a joke when they discussed the future alternatives: > For copyable and assignable references you can use std::reference_wrapper. ( http://…
> Why does this even exist?
When you use `std::bind` or `std::thread`, the arguments you pass are captured and stored by value. What if you want it to be captured as reference? You use a `std::reference_warpper` instead. Note you cannot use a pointer here because the type won't match, while `reference_wrapper` implicitly converts.
Re: Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
#37The fact that this headline cannot be distinguished from April Fools joke by other commenters seems to say a lot about the direction in which C++ standard committee is heading.
It’s not like the idea is completely crazy; pointer misuse is a big source of all kinds of problems, Rust shows how much can be done without constantly using raw pointers, and what are the C++ Core Guidelines if not an effort in exactly this direction? I finally “got” that this is a joke when they discussed the future alternatives: > For copyable and assignable references you can use std::reference_wrapper. ( http://…
cppreference explains it pretty well:
>std::reference_wrapper is a class template that wraps a reference in a copyable, assignable object. It is frequently used as a mechanism to store references inside standard containers (like std::vector) which cannot normally hold references.
>Specifically, std::reference_wrapper is a CopyConstructible and CopyAssignable wrapper around a reference [...] of type T. Instances of std::reference_wrapper are objects (they can be copied or stored in containers) but they are implicitly convertible to T&, so that they can be used as arguments with the functions that take the underlying type by reference.
Sounds pretty reasonable and useful to me. No need for over-the-top head banging :)
Re: Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
#38I've never done any real development with a language that uses pointers. So noob question: why would one use a pointer over passing a variable? (those are the two flavors right?)
Re: Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
#39This could be a joke. Or not. It is very much in keeping with the current direction of C++, which appears to be: "Oh no, C++ cannot keep pace with modern systems languages, let's repair it by whatever means possible" Their heart is in the right place, but perhaps this accelerated process of mutating the language will ultimately be what kills it. Personally, after having deep expertise in C++(11/14) I jumped ship to G…
[deleted]
Re: Deprecating Raw Pointers in C++20
#40This could be a joke. Or not. It is very much in keeping with the current direction of C++, which appears to be: "Oh no, C++ cannot keep pace with modern systems languages, let's repair it by whatever means possible" Their heart is in the right place, but perhaps this accelerated process of mutating the language will ultimately be what kills it. Personally, after having deep expertise in C++(11/14) I jumped ship to G…
>this accelerated process of mutating the language
Oh we can't be talking about the same language x) C++ moves fast? They took until 2017 to remove trigraphs for crying out loud! Absolutely nothing in C++>=11 breaks anything in the language.