In Defense of C++
dayvster.com
In Defense of C++
1–10 of 470 posts
Re: In Defense of C++
#2Re: In Defense of C++
#3Re: In Defense of C++
#4Great article. Modern C++ has come a really long way. I think lots of people have no idea about the newer features of the standard library and how much they minimize footguns.
Of course, the article doesn't mention lambdas.
Re: In Defense of C++
#5I just had a PR on an old C++ project, and spending 8 years in the web ecosystem have raised the bar around tooling expectations.
Rust is particularly sweet to work with in that regard.
Re: In Defense of C++
#6the truth
Re: In Defense of C++
#7Smart pointers are neat but they are not a solution for memory safety. Just using standard containers and iterators can lead to lots of footguns, or utils like string_view.
Re: In Defense of C++
#8When I made a meme about C++ [1] I was purposeful in choosing the iceberg format. To me it's not quite satisfying to say that C++ is merely complex or vast. A more fitting word would be "arcane", "monumental" or "titanic" (get it?). There's a specific feeling you get when you're trying to understand what the hell is an xvalue, why std::move doesn't move or why std::remove doesn't remove.
The Forest Gump C++ is another meme that captures this feeling very well (not by me) [2].
What it comes down to is developer experience (DX), and C++ has a terrible one. Down to syntax and all the way up to package management a C++ developper feels stuck to a time before they were born. At least we have a lot of time to think about all that while our code compiles. But that might just be the price for all the power it gives you.