111–120 of 221 posts
I like to watch Formula 1 and NASCAR races. As interesting as seeing the cars pushing the limit of materials and mechanics is just as interesting seeing them crash. It shows the flip side of design. I wish this sunny-side tutorials had at the end of their books some black pages with the hall of horrors. Weird compilation messages and pointers getting demoted and random segfaults in real scenarios. We all remember the…
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 im…
One thing that would have helped me when I started learning C++ was learning the C++ compilation model i.e. translation units. It is surprising how many people look surprised (that also claim they know the language) when you tell them that code in .cpp does not get inlined into other .cpp files no matter what doing compilation. (yes the linker can (and should) do that with LTO doing linking)
The linker doesn't inline anything, LTO/LTCG is about running (part of) the compile process at link time. But that's really no concern for the C++ code but an implementation detail of the toolchain - you could just as well not have a separate link step and instead have the compiler process all compilation units in one step.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Watch Lights & Magic on Disney+ and you will understand why the reference is in there. ILM, Pixar, WETA had huge influx on graphical swe... hell even photoshop was a sideproject of ILM at the time.
Isn't the wireframe death star scene the only part done in C (and therefore by computer) in the first movie? https://cdm.link/2021/11/watch-larry-cuba-explain-how-he-ani...
Basically I'd prefer to have a docker image with tooling that I can hook into.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Visual Studio will yell at you if your code isn't conforming to the "C++ Core Guidelines" (those guidelines basically define what "Modern C++" even means). Unfortunately it also yells at you when your *C* code violates the C++ Core Guidelines (at least it was a few years ago when I permamently switched that "feature" off).
Many of the "Core Guidelines" are semantic requirements which are (provably) Undecidable, so even if tooling was created for them the tooling would necessarily have either false positives or false negatives (those are the only options, unless "both" counts as another option). In practice most of these are unaddressed, Microsoft understandably focused on checks which are never wrong and give actionable advice. "Guidel…
Getting stuck in an infinite loop and never producing an answer is a 4th possibility for attempted solutions at deciding undecidable problems.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Visual Studio will yell at you if your code isn't conforming to the "C++ Core Guidelines" (those guidelines basically define what "Modern C++" even means). Unfortunately it also yells at you when your *C* code violates the C++ Core Guidelines (at least it was a few years ago when I permamently switched that "feature" off).
No, it defines what Microsoft C++ means and nothing more.