My Most Important C++ Aha Moments (2006)

Post by Rusky » Sun, Jun 26, 2016, 3:46 PM UTC

kmiroslav wrote: post #32

humanrebar wrote: post #14

> Realizing that C++’s “special” member functions may be declared private Don't do this anymore! Just delete them: MyClass& operator=(const MyClass&) = delete; Private-really-means-deleted was a cool and very useful trick before C++11. So useful, that it was a shame to require secret knowledge and aha moments to use. So they just made it a normal feature of the language. There's also a way to explicitly use the defau…

Interesting, I didn't know about `delete`. Come to think of it, the trick to make something private in order to "remove" it is one of these very few areas where C++ makes you pay for something you don't use, so I'm not surprised that there is now a special keyword (well, a repurposed keyword) to address that.

Post by nowne » Sun, Jun 26, 2016, 3:54 PM UTC

gliptic wrote: post #21

hendzen wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an obscure pitfall of making a class noncopyable by making the copy constructor private. Consider the following class: class X { private: X& (const X&); // not defined public: X bar() { X x = ......; return x; } }; Due to programmer error, an instance of X is returned by value despite the class being noncopyable. The copy constructor being private doesn't help as bar() is a method of X. This will compile and…

It might compile, but it won't link.

Post by kazinator » Sun, Jun 26, 2016, 4:30 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #44

hellofunk wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to dislike or hate C++ due to its immense complexity, and programmers like to be able to keep simple abstractions in their head so they can concentrate their energies on their problem domain without worrying about language confusion. With C and many other languages, this is possible as they are smaller languages. C++ on the other hand: is there any language with widespread use that is so deep and complex? H…

> safety Um, no. C++ can be safer than C (which is an incredibly low bar) but only if you carefully constrain yourself to certain subsets of the language, which is why the web is chock-a-block with byzantine "C++ coding standards" documents describing all the rules you have to follow in order to avoid shooting yourself in the foot.

Post by hellofunk » Sun, Jun 26, 2016, 4:43 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #44

hellofunk wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to dislike or hate C++ due to its immense complexity, and programmers like to be able to keep simple abstractions in their head so they can concentrate their energies on their problem domain without worrying about language confusion. With C and many other languages, this is possible as they are smaller languages. C++ on the other hand: is there any language with widespread use that is so deep and complex? H…

> safety Um, no. C++ can be safer than C (which is an incredibly low bar) but only if you carefully constrain yourself to certain subsets of the language, which is why the web is chock-a-block with byzantine "C++ coding standards" documents describing all the rules you have to follow in order to avoid shooting yourself in the foot.

Post by Retra » Sun, Jun 26, 2016, 4:52 PM UTC

kazinator wrote: post #45

lisper wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> safety Um, no. C++ can be safer than C (which is an incredibly low bar) but only if you carefully constrain yourself to certain subsets of the language, which is why the web is chock-a-block with byzantine "C++ coding standards" documents describing all the rules you have to follow in order to avoid shooting yourself in the foot.

Indeed that not only you have to follow, everyone else on the project has to follow, as well as every newcomer and every piece of third-party code that is brought in. "Avoid the parts you don't like" works best for one programmer working alone.