There are at least a dozen C++ intros that go through every little detail like this and I don't get it. I have a pretty good ability to retain a lot of information presented this way, and I've been programming in various C-like languages for long enough that much of this isn't new to me, but this doesn't seem like a good way to learn the material. I'd much rather work through actual programs and iterate on them. I imagine that a lot of people who would be looking for something this basic aren't even going to retain most of this nor understand why they would need most of these things they are memorizing.
Modern C++ Programming Course
91–100 of 221 posts
Re: Modern C++ Programming Course
#92[flagged]
[dead]
Re: Modern C++ Programming Course
#93[flagged]
Rust has a number of opinions that may not fit how you want to work. If you want to do a shared library rust will fight you. If you want to break your project up into multiple repositories rust will fight you. Rust will fight you if you don't want to use cargo as your build/package system. You can make it work, but the above are things that may or may not be acceptable costs to you.
Re: Modern C++ Programming Course
#94[flagged]
It depends on what your goals are. If you pick Rust for your product be ready to roll up your sleeves and contribute to the crates you are depending on. IMO your investment is worth it because developing in Rust is a delight and when it works it will be very solid, but the ecosystem isn't as mature yet.
If you want to focus on building a product and get something out there relatively quickly, C++ has a huge amount of ready-to-use libraries, but you're on your own with making sure to run sanitizers and making any sense of object lifetime and thread safety. You might ship an MVP faster but I wouldn't want to maintain it after that IMO.
Personally I've made peace with the Rust ecosystem being not-quite-there because I can see that many things are about to get to the point of being really solid. There's a lot of hard-working folks volunteering their time to build out great libraries, and I'm hopeful that the 2024 edition is going to be a huge improvement for async ergonomics.
Re: Modern C++ Programming Course
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuinely asking: Why many programmers need tools to enforce something upon them? Why not they can't take slow, be mindful about what they write and add a couple of layers as pre-commit hooks? Like a code formatter and maybe a linter? This makes me sad. Programmers have the knowledge base to make some of the most sophisticated things bend to their will, and they tell a programming language is bad, because they can ma…
First of all: I am failable. I do make mistakes, even if I concentrate. Secondly I want to verify code others wrote. If a tool does the first pass quickly and automatically, I can quickly ensure some basic level of compliance and can focus on the relevant part. In the end it boils down to: Let the computer do what a computer does and do the things a computer can't. Doesn't say, one shouldn't think, but computers are…
the problem is of course that tools aren't particularly smart. When you create heavy handed restrictions in your language, you're not just eliminating mistakes, you're eliminating tons of potential programs that make perfect sense, that's to say you drastically reduce the expressiveness of a language.
That's why Rust say, has an escape hatch. Unsafe Rust wouldn't exist if all you could write in it were mistakes. Async Rust is to put it plainly, a pain in the ass.
These high level tools are more like chemotherapy. You hope that they kill more of the bad code before they kill you. They're not sophisticated, and it's fairly reasonable to prefer a language that let's you opt-in to stricter safety rather than opt out.
Re: Modern C++ Programming Course
#96Any ideas where to start learning C++ as an embedded developer? I wrote many lines of bare metal C code and want to transit to higher level jobs. I see many expensive or completely free courses, but I am not sure which one is usable in my complicated situation.
It depends on what you target. I do alot of Kernel and really low level C++, and it's a completely different style than even app dev, so you have to be sure you don't go down the completely wrong route.
For my target space, there's a few rules for c++.
Footguns: A. No STL, it causes to much bloat when binary size is critical. B. (almost) No inheritance or virtual functions. Again, it causes some bloat and adds in some instructions and code to support these features that can cause issues in low level environments.
Things to learn (All work in the kernel):
A. Learn templates, especially c++20. Templates add ZERO bloat, they literally just generate the function again with proper types the same way a macro would.
B. Use RAII.
C. Use constructors and overloading.
D. Zero pointers should be exposed to code except where absolutely needed. If you need to pass by reference, use the c++ style.
E. All allocations should be wrapped in a class with RAII. You can overload the operators on the class to make it seem like a pointer so you can still do if(!RAIIPointer).
A good video on kernel c++ is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsSMKL5vaXw . You can use a surprising amount of C++ language features in the kernel and it makes it extremely smooth and safe if you do it properly.
Re: Modern C++ Programming Course
#97Re: Modern C++ Programming Course
#98There are at least a dozen C++ intros that go through every little detail like this and I don't get it. I have a pretty good ability to retain a lot of information presented this way, and I've been programming in various C-like languages for long enough that much of this isn't new to me, but this doesn't seem like a good way to learn the material. I'd much rather work through actual programs and iterate on them. I im…
I agree with your grievance: Many c++ tutorials are basically like: these are the internal workings of how the graphite in a pencil is structured, now go draw the rest of the owl.
I am not saying that this isn't important, but learning about pointers and references is totally useless unless someone shows you why you would use them, where you would use them etc.
Re: Modern C++ Programming Course
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe, in this context it makes lots of sense, if you know C well there are things which "just work how you expect" in C++ and so they need at most a brief refresher. I agree with Kate Gregory that this is a bad way to teach C++ from scratch. That is, if you know only say, Python or Java (or nothing) and want to learn C++, you should not begin by learning C. Kate's approach skips many of the things you can do in C++…
There is a considerable divergence of opinion on that subject. In my view, C++ isn't remotely suitable as a programming language for someone without a healthy understanding of C. Perhaps a dialect of C++ could be developed that was more of a cousin to Rust, but C++ as we know it is a C like programming language with a very large number of features added and all the ways to fail just like a C program does. There are r…
> C++ isn't remotely suitable as a programming language for someone without a healthy understanding of C.
I always look askance at folks who say they know C++ but not C. The C++ abstract machine is built over the C abstract machine and it becomes even more clearer when you go down to the binary level.
Re: Modern C++ Programming Course
#100> Heap Memory - new, delete Keywords
Should "modern" C++ even use new/delete? I'm a C++ n00b, but I thought these can be avoided entirely now.