4 ms·

>> modern C++ Well, according to Stroustrup himself C++98/03 is considered "modern C++" (see e.g. https://www.stroustrup.com/DnE2005.pdf https://www.stroustrup

by Rochus 5y ago

>> modern C++ Well, according to Stroustrup himself C++98/03 is considered "modern C++" (see e.g. https://www.stroustrup.com/DnE2005.pdf https://www.stroustrup.com/DnE2005.pdf ); and I can confirm from personal experience that C++98 and STL were a big step compared to what we had before. C++11 and later have some advantages, but nothing I couldn't live without (personally I don't consider policy based design the way to go). Actually Qt itself nicely demonstrated how to do perfectly well without e.g. move semantics.

detaro 5y ago
Kind of besides the point that "C++98 to avoid issues" when porting to a project that requires C++20 seems a bit odd. (And let's say that the quality of Qt's solutions in such cases over what you can now do is ... controversial)
- Rochus 5y ago
  Does SerenityOS require all apps to be implemented in C++ or even C++20? I guess not (didn't have a close look at it yet).
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    Obviously not, if so many non-C++ programs are ported to run on it. Kernel, core libraries, and native programs are C++20. Don't expect pull requests for archaic-styled patches to those to be merged.
ncmncm 5y ago
That was published 16 years ago. Fortunately, Andreas isn't so confused. C++20 is a wholly more pleasant programming environment than any previous C++. When there is a choice between the old way and the new—which there always is, for backward compatibility—the new way is almost always better. For some cases, the newer way is better sometimes but not always, e.g. east function return type, with "auto", vs. old-style west. For short functions, deduced return type, i.e. neither one, is often best. All that said, C++20 coroutines will be much more pleasant to use when thd C++23 library support for them lands.
- Rochus 5y ago
  > You are very confused Because I'm not obsessed with chasing the latest thing?
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    Do you need it explained why a document published in 2005 is not a reliable guide to modernity in 2021? Cppreference.com is an excellent resource to help you get caught up. BoostCon vids on Youtube are also helpful.
    - Rochus 5y ago
      > Do you need it explained why a document published in 2005 is not ... Oh yes, let your wisdom be poured out upon us. And no, age alone is not relevant to the quality of literature.
      - ncmncm 5y ago
        Apparently, you do. A document published in 2005 can rely only on information available on or before 2005. The latest C++ Standard in 2005 was C++03. Since it was written, C++11, C++14, C++17, and C++20 were released, which the old document can have no information about. Each release substantially changed the C++ language, C++11 and C++20 radically. Thus, a document from 2005 can only tell you what was modern in 2005, which is necessarily very different from what is modern in 2021. Maybe it would help you to look up "modern" in the dictionary.

by Rochus 5y ago

detaro 5y ago

Kind of besides the point that "C++98 to avoid issues" when porting to a project that requires C++20 seems a bit odd. (And let's say that the quality of Qt's solutions in such cases over what you can now do is ... controversial)

Rochus 5y ago
Does SerenityOS require all apps to be implemented in C++ or even C++20? I guess not (didn't have a close look at it yet).
- ncmncm 5y ago
  Obviously not, if so many non-C++ programs are ported to run on it. Kernel, core libraries, and native programs are C++20. Don't expect pull requests for archaic-styled patches to those to be merged.

ncmncm 5y ago

That was published 16 years ago. Fortunately, Andreas isn't so confused. C++20 is a wholly more pleasant programming environment than any previous C++. When there is a choice between the old way and the new—which there always is, for backward compatibility—the new way is almost always better. For some cases, the newer way is better sometimes but not always, e.g. east function return type, with "auto", vs. old-style west. For short functions, deduced return type, i.e. neither one, is often best. All that said, C++20 coroutines will be much more pleasant to use when thd C++23 library support for them lands.

Rochus 5y ago
> You are very confused Because I'm not obsessed with chasing the latest thing?
- ncmncm 5y ago
  Do you need it explained why a document published in 2005 is not a reliable guide to modernity in 2021? Cppreference.com is an excellent resource to help you get caught up. BoostCon vids on Youtube are also helpful.
  - Rochus 5y ago
    > Do you need it explained why a document published in 2005 is not ... Oh yes, let your wisdom be poured out upon us. And no, age alone is not relevant to the quality of literature.
    - ncmncm 5y ago
      Apparently, you do. A document published in 2005 can rely only on information available on or before 2005. The latest C++ Standard in 2005 was C++03. Since it was written, C++11, C++14, C++17, and C++20 were released, which the old document can have no information about. Each release substantially changed the C++ language, C++11 and C++20 radically. Thus, a document from 2005 can only tell you what was modern in 2005, which is necessarily very different from what is modern in 2021. Maybe it would help you to look up "modern" in the dictionary.