Not sure what to make of this. Specifically: × There is quite absolutely no need for some fancypants IDE. Use a text editor that can indent stuff automaticall

Not sure what to make of this. Specifically: × There is quite absolutely no need for some fancypants IDE. Use a text editor that can indent stuff automatically and maybe has some syntax highlighting and you’re good to go and write all the code you want. Yes, even C++! × The split between header files and translation units is ugly, especially if part of your class can be in a translation unit and part of it is templated and must be in a header file. But if your class is all-header, you just have a single file (which may be compiled into more than one block of code for templates); if your class is not templated, you just have a nice little header with your comments and the implementation hidden away. Yes, you may need to add a new field to both your header and your constructor implementation if you want it to be different in different constructor calls, but that’s hardly avoidable?! × The C preprocessor might be ugly sometimes. Don’t use it if you think that. Everything will be fine. You’ll be okay. × Namespaces are extremely useful to separate different sets of functions and classes. I find std::vector and boost::program_options::options much more readable than StdVector and BoostProgramOptionsOption. There’s only so many letters in the alphabet, names will need to be long eventually. If you really don’t like namespaces, just use using generously. × Portability is fine between decent compilers on decent operating systems. Yes, Microsofts Visual Studio sucked big time for a long time and if you want to use a Unix-native compiler on a weird platform, things might be strange. But I haven’t seen a Unix yet where I couldn’t compile my code. × Not sure what to make of the next paragraph, are they just complaining that they can’t keep a mental model of some header files in their mind and that this must absolutely be the fault of the language? × I don’t get the issue with std::chrono::duration. The reference is clear, the code is not too horrible and the C# code isn’t even better? × Hint: \n does exactly what you want. × push_back() and emplace_back() are two very different things and I’m glad that they’re different functions, as that makes it very clear whether you’re copying stuff around or constructing it in-place. × The (few) bits of the boost library that I used so far were amazingly well documented. Yes, if you want to dig a little deeper, you may have to read some not-so-easy to understand code, but have you seen the code that powers your lovely C# runtime? Do you think it would be substantially easier to understand?