3 ms·
That's what Herb Sutter argues in his Almost Always Auto post, but I would disagree: 1. The IDE cannot deduce the type within templates, and more code is movin
by millstone 11y ago
That's what Herb Sutter argues in his Almost Always Auto post, but I would disagree:
1. The IDE cannot deduce the type within templates, and more code is moving to templates (e.g. generic lambdas in C++14)
2. Code is often read outside of IDEs: code review, search engines, etc.
3. Should C++ become a language that requires an IDE to work effectively, like Java? Probably not.
- CyberDildonics 11y agoI would be very surprised if someone can meaningfully review C++ templates without an IDE. Really not reviewing a program inside an IDE is a poor idea in general.
- dman 11y agoSome of us still use emacs and vim.
- pjmlp 11y agoYeah, some of us still listen to vinyl and tube radios.
- dman 11y agoUnfortunately all the ides I tried make it non trivial to write extensions. I program nearly 9 hours a day and using a tool that prevents automation of common tasks is suboptimal.
- irremediable 11y agoSurely people using vim/emacs for serious C++ work are going to at least have ctags, and probably something like YouCompleteMe?
- dman 11y agoI use emacs with rtags.
- anon4 11y agoTo clarify, with plugins such as ctags, rtags and YouCompleteMe. I would never be able to write large C++ programs in vanilla vim. Maaaybe plain C, but definitely not C++.