GCC Developers Look At Transitioning Their Codebase To C++11

[pal666]

I only use C arrays for fixed-size ones or when I really desire speed.

c arrays decay to pointers. it's advisable to forbid constant size c arrays

...modules? Is this a replacement to libraries, or something like Java packages?

replacement to headers(preprocessor text inclusion)

[elatllat]

[Rust] isn't portable, it's llvm only. and that is c++14 already btw

A glass 1/100th empty (99/100 full);
https://forge.rust-lang.org/release/...m-support.html

[pal666]

That is what all big companies use. Proven industry standards that work across all compilers so they are not tied to specific crap.

is microsoft big enough company for you? most of c++17 works across all compilers that matter

[pal666]

A glass 1/100th empty (99/100 full);

you missed the part where they are concerned with c++14 portability and you have c++14 when you have rust

[pal666]

C++20 isn't the latest and greatest. It is still future tech, since the none of big features are yet implemented in a non-experimental way by any compiler.

it's future tech because it was not ratified yet

[pal666]

Okay, so you mean manual deallocations. You can still use-after-free, with std::unique_ptr<>,

not via this unique_ptr

If I'm using an initializer list, then std::array<> forces me to redundantly specify the length as a template parameter.

int vals[] = { 1, 2, 3 };

only if you are using obsolete standard. c++17 brings https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/la...ment_deduction so you can write

[COLOR=#000000]std::array vals { [/COLOR][COLOR=#09885a]1[/COLOR][COLOR=#000000], [/COLOR][COLOR=#09885a]2[/COLOR][COLOR=#000000], [/COLOR][COLOR=#09885a]3[/COLOR][COLOR=#000000] };[/COLOR]

you see, now i can argue that c array forces you to redundantly specify int as its element type

[pal666]

Anyway, if you might need to erase, I think your best options are:

• use iterators
• iterate by index (if randomly-accessible container)

i'd start with https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/ex...ector/erase_if

[pal666]

Heh, you'll never be truly rid of macros. Just try writing assert() without using macros, to give one use case.

just wait for contracts in c++23 (i feel pity for people who get them only in 2028. i feel pity we aren't going to get them in c++20)

[pal666]

As a Lisp user, my mind boggles at how you C++ programmers survived without lambda expressions.

as a c++ user my mind boggles at how you scheme programmers survived without static typing

For people who are curious, they are just unnamed procedures that evaluate to a value. (aka function expressions)

in c++ they are certainly not procedures. they are unnamed class objects with overloaded operator() (functors)

JavaScript also has a really fantastic syntax for them.

const square = (x) => x * x

c++ had proposal with similar syntax, it was rejected due to technical issues. you see, c++ committee has to design sane language, unlike javascript. but maybe someone comes with improved proposal in fufure

What do you mean? That book was fantastic! There is a similar tome for Java (I think it’s just called Effective Java) that is equally good, but reminds me precisely why I’d rather use Clojure than Java.

all cool kids are already switched to kotlin

[pal666]

So there is no way to do it using the easily-readable syntax? Oh....

there is a way to pass your loop body as predicate to erase_if()

Because I use clock_gettime since I think it takes less time to execute.

chrono also uses clock_gettime https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/bl.../chrono.cc#L88