41–50 of 437 posts
[flagged]
Sadly, transparent hash strings for unordered_map are out.
[flagged]
Please don't use Hacker News as a religious or ideological battleground. It tramples curiosity. Please don't pick the most religiously/ideologically provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead.
Are you a moderator? The directive tone of this post is as if from an authority figure, but, but I do not believe you are one.
I do not believe there is anything about a religious or ideological background here. Could you please clarify?
I also believe it is your post that could be more accurately described as trampling curiosity; I believe there is a role reversal, in that I think your comment is a better description for trampling curiosity than the post your are responding. I'm not trying to be snarky - I'm curious how you came to those conclusions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Modules are a failed idea. Really really hard for me to see them becoming mainstream at this point.
The idea is great, the execution is terrible. In JS, modules were instantly popular because they were easy to use, added a lot of benefit, and support in browsers and the ecoysystem was fairly good after a couple of years. In C++, support is still bad, 6 years after they were introduced.
Biggest open question is whether the small changes to the module system in this standard will actually lead to more widespread adoption
The best thing the C++ WG could do is to spend an entire release cycle working on modules and packaging. It's nice to have new features, but what is really killing C++ is Cargo. I don't think a new generation of developers are going to be inspired to learn a language where you can't simply `cargo add` whatever you need and instead have to go through hell to use a dependency.
I am somewhat dismayed that contracts were accepted. It feels like piling on ever more complexity to a language which has already surpassed its complexity budget, and given that the feature comes with its own set of footguns I'm not sure that it is justified. Here's a quote from Bjarne, > So go back about one year, and we could vote about it before it got into the standard, and some of us voted no. Now we have a much…
An argument can be made that C++26 features like reflection add complexity but I don't follow that argument for contracts.
Finally, reflection has arrived, five years after I last touched a line in c++. I wonder how long would it take the committee, if ever, to introduce destructing move.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best thing the C++ WG could do is to spend an entire release cycle working on modules and packaging. It's nice to have new features, but what is really killing C++ is Cargo. I don't think a new generation of developers are going to be inspired to learn a language where you can't simply `cargo add` whatever you need and instead have to go through hell to use a dependency.
I’m still surprised how people ignore Meson. Please test it :) https://mesonbuild.com/ And Mesons awesome dependency handling: https://mesonbuild.com/Dependencies.html https://mesonbuild.com/Using-the-WrapDB.html#using-the-wrapd... https://nibblestew.blogspot.com/2026/02/c-and-c-dependencies... I suffered with Java from Any, Maven and Gradle (the oldest is the the best). After reading about GNU Autotools I was wonder…
> I’m still surprised how people ignore Meson. Please test it :)
I did just that a few years ago and found it rather inconvenient and inflexible, so I went back to ignoring it. But YMMV I suppose.
> After reading about GNU Autotools
Consider Kitware's CMake.
It does have a runtime cost. There's an attribute to force undefined behavior on read again and avoid the cost:
int x [[indeterminate]];
std::cin >> x;