2 ms·
it's a double edged sword though. after a while, you end up with some parts of the code written in c++98 style, some that uses odd c++0x extensions, a bunch of
by leetcrew 6y ago
it's a double edged sword though. after a while, you end up with some parts of the code written in c++98 style, some that uses odd c++0x extensions, a bunch of c++11 style code, and then c++14/c++17 features sprinkled around in the newest code (or sometimes refactored into older paradigms). to be an effective developer for an older codebase, you need to understand a lot of history surrounding the feature sets to understand design decisions from the past.
- jeffbee 6y agoIt takes discipline and tooling to effectively eradicate older idioms from your code, but it is worth doing. Regarding tooling, check out ClangMR https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en//pubs/archive/41342.pdf https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.c...
- bluGill 6y agoWhat is your alternative? Do the great rewrite every few years to the latest fads? Some have done that successfully, but it is expensive to get right and many more have failed. In general, if it ain't broke don't break it is a great use of resources, which keeps your company in business (thus you making steady paycheck and going home to your family at night). Fix/update the parts that need updating because they change and let the working stuff keep working. I will give a nod to the other poster who pointed out automatic tools. They are often worth running on everything, but they only fix a fraction of the things that a sane developer with 20/20 hindsight starting over would do differently.
- dragontamer 6y agoI mean, is it harder than writing code in C++98 style, then suddenly having to deal with C++ and Rust combinations from 2015 onwards? I'd say C++98 + C++17 is easier to deal with than C++98 + Rust.