4 ms·
As "amazing" as this different type of error correction is, doesn't it point to the fact that C++ is hopeless in and of itself. When I'm using a language, alar
by wendroid 17y ago
As "amazing" as this different type of error correction is, doesn't it point to the fact that C++ is hopeless in and of itself.
When I'm using a language, alarm bells ring when I find myself needing to type something like :
std::vector<char> v(std::istream_iterator<char>(ifs), std::istream_iterator<char>());
- signa11 17y agotypedefs might help...
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- mahmud 17y agoI agree 100% the parent is off-topic and inflammatory, but, please, typedefs are not the solution. With C++ most of the time, one is either consuming a huge/important library (even an OS SDK) or writing one. If you're consuming the librarie(s), you just can't go around typedefing important APIs, or you will end up maintaining a nightmare of a fork. And if you're writing one, the sensible thing to do is to stick with a tangible subset of C++, like most good libraries do. Seriously, if your C++ code starts to look ugly, you're probably using the language to its full potential. Don't do that. Scale back to a manageable C-like subset; And no, you can't grow your C++ code-base to a blissful Greenspun-esque nirvana; more C++ begets, well, MORE C++. Those multi-page Doxygen class listings and woolly dependency diagrams never gel and mesh into something organic. The code-base just grows diagonally, and orthogonal to your intended direction..
- leftnode 17y agoStop, comments like these are pointless when discussing a C/C++ compiler. Yes, some people dislike C++, but some people also love it, and when a new compiler offers some really neat error reporting, complaining about C++ does no good. To the Clang team, this is damn impressive. I've never thought about a compiler detecting merge conflicts, but thats pretty cool.