21–30 of 38 posts
The amount of background knowledge you need to understand what’s happening here... I don’t envy people who have to catch up becoming more and more convinced that when sfinae opened the Turing hatch it doomed c++
traits + "constexpr if" replace SFINAE.
I found the use of 'if constexpr' in the example pretty nasty. I would have thought it more idiomatic to use std::enable_if to enable different implementations of 'algorithm' as in the example of 'construct' and 'destroy' given here: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types/enable_if
The right solution are of course concepts.
The amount of background knowledge you need to understand what’s happening here... I don’t envy people who have to catch up becoming more and more convinced that when sfinae opened the Turing hatch it doomed c++
Not a whole lot, actually. You can go from C to this in about a week if you’re focused. (I did this a few years ago when learning C++. Now if you want to talk about initialization, that’s a whole ‘nother story…)
The amount of background knowledge you need to understand what’s happening here... I don’t envy people who have to catch up becoming more and more convinced that when sfinae opened the Turing hatch it doomed c++
The amount of background knowledge you need to understand what’s happening here... I don’t envy people who have to catch up becoming more and more convinced that when sfinae opened the Turing hatch it doomed c++
The amount of background knowledge you need to understand what’s happening here... I don’t envy people who have to catch up becoming more and more convinced that when sfinae opened the Turing hatch it doomed c++
I think that’s unfair. While “sfinae’ itself is a mouthful, what it says in practice is that template expansion observes the principle of “least surprise” which is inherently user friendly.
You certainly don’t need to know the acronym, or even of the idea, to benefit from it. I stead, the developer won’t be presented with a confusing error message when the thing they want to happen is supported but not the first possibility examined.
The amount of background knowledge you need to understand what’s happening here... I don’t envy people who have to catch up becoming more and more convinced that when sfinae opened the Turing hatch it doomed c++
It just looks kinda wrong to me - If your generic template has to switch on what type it's been passed, surely you've made it too generic somewhere? Adding back conditional compilation or execution afterwards strikes me as the same sort of code-smell as checking if something is an instance of a given class before then casting it and calling a member - you've lost information and using some sort of reflection to get i…
The amount of background knowledge you need to understand what’s happening here... I don’t envy people who have to catch up becoming more and more convinced that when sfinae opened the Turing hatch it doomed c++
I mean, even if you never saw a "constexpr" before, isn't it pretty clear from the example and the name, well, "constexpr" want's going on? Same for the other newish C++ features.
I thought it was a nice little primer.
The amount of background knowledge you need to understand what’s happening here... I don’t envy people who have to catch up becoming more and more convinced that when sfinae opened the Turing hatch it doomed c++
> …when sfinae opened the Turing hatch it doomed c++… I think that’s unfair. While “sfinae’ itself is a mouthful, what it says in practice is that template expansion observes the principle of “least surprise” which is inherently user friendly. You certainly don’t need to know the acronym, or even of the idea, to benefit from it. I stead, the developer won’t be presented with a confusing error message when the thing t…
The argument is I think, that because sfinae effectively added an "if" statement to C++ templates, it made templates turing complete. It made it possible to write all kinds insane, undebuggable programs purely at compile-time, in the most terrible purely functional language imaginable. People did exactly that, which went fine until their colleagues (or users of open source libraries) did something unexpected and got screenfuls of errors.
Wikipedia's sfinae page has a nice story about how it added compile-time introspection and conditionals to the language: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitution_failure_is_not_an...
I found the use of 'if constexpr' in the example pretty nasty. I would have thought it more idiomatic to use std::enable_if to enable different implementations of 'algorithm' as in the example of 'construct' and 'destroy' given here: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types/enable_if