3 ms·

I did not mention reusable anywhere in my comment. If you are writing code to be reusable, you are writing a library and in that case you better make sure that

• letstrynvm 8y ago
  Yeah... you mentioned >>> maintainable, testable, extendable and configurable but not reusable. I'm not blaming you, or disagreeing... C++ didn't produce reusable results for me either. I dunno what you were doing 20 years ago, but I was doing this... there wasn't any problem with the classes being unclean or the boundaries cut in the wrong place. It was simply I was almost never going to use those classes a second time. If they had been C functions, I would not have needed them a second time, either, almost always. After a year or two I realized that being the case, the entire loving OO encapsulation of then was not simply worthless but an active waste of time. And I went back to C. If you get value from other C++ things that make it worth paying the price, that's great. But file away for a possible future horrifying 3am realization, perhaps nothing is worth the price of a gyre like boost, and just writing it in high quality C may be a better answer.
  • slededit 8y ago
    In modern C++ the real reason is RAII automatic cleanup. Of course you really only need a dtor for that.