5 ms·

This person is not a very good C++ programmer. Also for some of the things he mentions, it will be covered by the Reflection TS. 1. Size of a static array: Use

This person is not a very good C++ programmer. Also for some of the things he mentions, it will be covered by the Reflection TS. 1. Size of a static array: Use std::array please 2. Maximum value of an enum: See reflection TS 3. Converting enum to string: ditto 4. Converting string to enum: ditto 5. #pragma once: see modules. They are in fact trying to make something better. There are also some cases where you don't want/need it 6. C99 designated initializers. They are there! 7. Binary file includes. Ugh this is just such a dumb idea I can't even. When do you want the file to load? When the executable does? What if you want to read it in chunks? This idea is not well suited for a systems-oriented language 8. FourCC codes. Again, this is a silly idea not even worth addressing. Just define it yourself. C++ is a programming language. Not your media toolkit 9. do/while(0). What are you using macros for in 2016 (the time of writing)? 10. preprocessor gripes. Stop using it! You have <type_traits> and stuff now 11. Switch/case is stupid. No it's not. You want fall/through cases as well and if you can't see why, don't criticize. This is true in pretty much EVERY language that supports switch/case 12. Still no strong typedefs. There are! Use the explicit keyword on a constructor definition. 13. Types as Primitives. See reflection TS Basically, this feels like any other "C++ rant." Someone who didn't learn the language properly or respects what the language needs to achieve.

stabbles 9y ago
Some good points. But "See reflection TS", really? That lands only in C++20. This article is from 2016.
- wrsh07 9y ago
  Yeah, but look at when C++ started getting regular releases. These are hard problems, and the things in 11, 14, and 17 are useful. Ultimately, people [on the committee and developing the language] are prioritizing what they need. It's not a closed process; it's just a slow one.
drngdds 9y ago
What's Reflection TS?
- metalliqaz 9y ago
  It's a proposal for inclusion into the C++ standard.
- Posibyte 9y ago
  It took me a minute with a few googles, but the TS in this case means "Technical Specification", which helped out a ton with searching. Unfortunately, I'm still not 100% this is what they're referring to, but I think this is it. https://isocpp.org/files/papers/n3996.pdf https://isocpp.org/files/papers/n3996.pdf EDIT: Here it is :D https://www.meetingcpp.com/blog/items/reflections-on-the-reflection-proposals.html https://www.meetingcpp.com/blog/items/reflections-on-the-ref...
pcwalton 9y ago
> This person is not a very good C++ programmer. Am I a bad C++ programmer for agreeing with some of it? > 5. #pragma once: see modules. They are in fact trying to make something better. There are also some cases where you don't want/need it The fact that modules have taken so long, and still have prominent members of the community saying they need to be sent back to the drawing board, is a legitimate criticism. > 7. Binary file includes. Ugh this is just such a dumb idea I can't even. It's a useful feature, much used in the language I work on, allowing you to distribute a program that needs just one or two static data files as a single executable. It's also good for packaging data as libraries: for instance, Unicode libraries need a lot of random tables and it can be convenient to store these in binary form. Having to embed binary in C/C++ syntax as, say, ICU does just adds parsing overhead at compile time for no reason. > 9. do/while(0). What are you using macros for in 2016 (the time of writing)? There are lots of use cases of macros, too many to list here. Templates don't always suffice. > 11. Switch/case is stupid. No it's not. You want fall/through cases as well and if you can't see why, don't criticize. This is true in pretty much EVERY language that supports switch/case I designed much of the pattern matching system in an industry language without fall through in switch case and I have never missed it. Nor has anyone else in the community I know of.
- metalliqaz 9y ago
  I think you can regard switch/case as syntax sugar for a series of if/else. So fallthrough may not be needed but more sugar is nice to have available.
- fwsgonzo 9y ago
  Yep, I also think modules are still relatively far away. I also hope that the C++ community can embrace some package management system.. at some point in time. Hopefully before I die
- to3m 9y ago
  C# lets you do "goto case XXX" to go to another case, and empty cases fall through to the next. This is a bit inconsistent, but it at least retains the useful fall-through case, gets rid of the usually-undesirable case, and still accommodates the occasional exceptions.
metalliqaz 9y ago
This comment is hilarious. C++ is more than 30 years old now, and you're expecting users to have mastered proposed future enhancements?
- wrsh07 9y ago
  If you're going to complain about missing features in the language, you should probably be aware of what plans are being made for the language's future...
  - PopsiclePete 9y ago
    Dude, for code I'm writing today, your future solutions are worth nothing.
    - banachtarski 9y ago
      Most of these features are available in the core language already. The ones that aren't are implemented in the form of libraries. Like every other language...
ender341341 9y ago
> 7. Binary file includes. Ugh this is just such a dumb idea I can't even. When do you want the file to load? When the executable does? What if you want to read it in chunks? This idea is not well suited for a systems-oriented language This can be really useful in embedded devices where there is no file system but I don't really see the need for it to be part of the language, every time I've needed it the toolchain came with build tools to handle this. > 11. Switch/case is stupid. No it's not. You want fall/through cases as well and if you can't see why, don't criticize. This is true in pretty much EVERY language that supports switch/case a smarter option may have been to require an explicit break or fallthrough keyword but we're a good 40 years late. >12. Still no strong typedefs. There are! Use the explicit keyword on a constructor definition. Define a new wrapper class (maybe I'm missing something)? It would be a lot nicer if you could do something like `typedef explicit int FooId;`
- Koshkin 9y ago
  > Define a new wrapper class For simple types, for which this makes most sense but from which you cannot inherit, it is a lot of work.
  - tempodox 9y ago
    Just to play devil's advocate, you could make a template for defining such wrappers. But then, it might just as well be built into the language for elimination of such boilerplate.
DonbunEf7 9y ago
Languages where switch-statements or switch-expressions don't fallthrough by default include Ada, C#, E, Go, Monte, Perl, Swift, and I think basically every flavor of Pascal. "Pretty much every language," right? C++ is right in there with C, JavaScript, and PHP.
dpc_pw 9y ago
> This person is not a very good C++ programmer. This is the biggest thing that is wrong with C++. Everything is always stupid human's fault. :D

stabbles 9y ago

Some good points. But "See reflection TS", really? That lands only in C++20. This article is from 2016.

wrsh07 9y ago
Yeah, but look at when C++ started getting regular releases. These are hard problems, and the things in 11, 14, and 17 are useful. Ultimately, people [on the committee and developing the language] are prioritizing what they need. It's not a closed process; it's just a slow one.

drngdds 9y ago

What's Reflection TS?

metalliqaz 9y ago
It's a proposal for inclusion into the C++ standard.
Posibyte 9y ago
It took me a minute with a few googles, but the TS in this case means "Technical Specification", which helped out a ton with searching. Unfortunately, I'm still not 100% this is what they're referring to, but I think this is it. https://isocpp.org/files/papers/n3996.pdf https://isocpp.org/files/papers/n3996.pdf EDIT: Here it is :D https://www.meetingcpp.com/blog/items/reflections-on-the-reflection-proposals.html https://www.meetingcpp.com/blog/items/reflections-on-the-ref...

pcwalton 9y ago

> This person is not a very good C++ programmer. Am I a bad C++ programmer for agreeing with some of it? > 5. #pragma once: see modules. They are in fact trying to make something better. There are also some cases where you don't want/need it The fact that modules have taken so long, and still have prominent members of the community saying they need to be sent back to the drawing board, is a legitimate criticism. > 7. Binary file includes. Ugh this is just such a dumb idea I can't even. It's a useful feature, much used in the language I work on, allowing you to distribute a program that needs just one or two static data files as a single executable. It's also good for packaging data as libraries: for instance, Unicode libraries need a lot of random tables and it can be convenient to store these in binary form. Having to embed binary in C/C++ syntax as, say, ICU does just adds parsing overhead at compile time for no reason. > 9. do/while(0). What are you using macros for in 2016 (the time of writing)? There are lots of use cases of macros, too many to list here. Templates don't always suffice. > 11. Switch/case is stupid. No it's not. You want fall/through cases as well and if you can't see why, don't criticize. This is true in pretty much EVERY language that supports switch/case I designed much of the pattern matching system in an industry language without fall through in switch case and I have never missed it. Nor has anyone else in the community I know of.

metalliqaz 9y ago
I think you can regard switch/case as syntax sugar for a series of if/else. So fallthrough may not be needed but more sugar is nice to have available.
fwsgonzo 9y ago
Yep, I also think modules are still relatively far away. I also hope that the C++ community can embrace some package management system.. at some point in time. Hopefully before I die
to3m 9y ago
C# lets you do "goto case XXX" to go to another case, and empty cases fall through to the next. This is a bit inconsistent, but it at least retains the useful fall-through case, gets rid of the usually-undesirable case, and still accommodates the occasional exceptions.

metalliqaz 9y ago

This comment is hilarious. C++ is more than 30 years old now, and you're expecting users to have mastered proposed future enhancements?

wrsh07 9y ago
If you're going to complain about missing features in the language, you should probably be aware of what plans are being made for the language's future...
- PopsiclePete 9y ago
  Dude, for code I'm writing today, your future solutions are worth nothing.
  - banachtarski 9y ago
    Most of these features are available in the core language already. The ones that aren't are implemented in the form of libraries. Like every other language...

ender341341 9y ago

> 7. Binary file includes. Ugh this is just such a dumb idea I can't even. When do you want the file to load? When the executable does? What if you want to read it in chunks? This idea is not well suited for a systems-oriented language This can be really useful in embedded devices where there is no file system but I don't really see the need for it to be part of the language, every time I've needed it the toolchain came with build tools to handle this. > 11. Switch/case is stupid. No it's not. You want fall/through cases as well and if you can't see why, don't criticize. This is true in pretty much EVERY language that supports switch/case a smarter option may have been to require an explicit break or fallthrough keyword but we're a good 40 years late. >12. Still no strong typedefs. There are! Use the explicit keyword on a constructor definition. Define a new wrapper class (maybe I'm missing something)? It would be a lot nicer if you could do something like `typedef explicit int FooId;`

Koshkin 9y ago
> Define a new wrapper class For simple types, for which this makes most sense but from which you cannot inherit, it is a lot of work.
- tempodox 9y ago
  Just to play devil's advocate, you could make a template for defining such wrappers. But then, it might just as well be built into the language for elimination of such boilerplate.

DonbunEf7 9y ago

Languages where switch-statements or switch-expressions don't fallthrough by default include Ada, C#, E, Go, Monte, Perl, Swift, and I think basically every flavor of Pascal. "Pretty much every language," right? C++ is right in there with C, JavaScript, and PHP.

dpc_pw 9y ago

> This person is not a very good C++ programmer. This is the biggest thing that is wrong with C++. Everything is always stupid human's fault. :D