4 ms·

You can read code in most languages and guess at what it does. But that doesn't mean you can write it - or debug it. I'm not complaining. Herb Sutter has his a

You can read code in most languages and guess at what it does. But that doesn't mean you can write it - or debug it. I'm not complaining. Herb Sutter has his arguments for why experts should write code this way. But I don't think newcomers should attempt to write in this way. You can't understand iterators before you understand pointers, or templates before concrete types and functions, or emplace_back before push_back, or Concepts before classes, or auto before concrete types. You may be able to use them, but you won't understand them, and you'll be useless when things go wrong. One last illustration: you mention your experience with statically typed languages. But C++ templates provide much less static type checking than non-template code. It is definitely not a place to start.

eropple 10y ago
C++ templates provide type checking exactly within their bounds, which this particular example illustrates, so...well, what? Posit for a second that you are correct. I think you're not, but let's posit that you are. And then I just think...so what? I don't mean that to be flip: what's the point of your post if it's not to air complaints that "newcomers might have trouble"? I mean, yeah, all things being equal, approachability is nice--but newcomers have trouble with chainsaws, flying planes, and 240V wiring. Hard things are hard. C++ is hard. It's why it's a tool of last resort, if you are wise. If you're not, nothing's gonna help you, yeah?