3 ms·
I wholeheartedly support the elimination of harmful languages. There's just no good reason these days for anyone to use C++.
by cperciva 4y ago
I wholeheartedly support the elimination of harmful languages. There's just no good reason these days for anyone to use C++.
- gpderetta 4y agoWe were always at war with C++
- ohCh6zos 4y agoThe proper term is double-plus-C
- oxfeed65261 4y ago…then what is double-plus-un-C? A lisp? (and is “lisp” problematic?)
- cudgy 4y agoViolation. Using the term “we” implies agreement among all present.
- return_to_monke 4y agocorrect. only big brother must agree.
- onetimeusename 4y ago> not referring to a specific standard of C++ This is a violation and implies that all of the C++ language is the same which may be offensive to users of a specific standard such as ISO/IEC 14882:2017. Referring to C++ generically ignores any differences between specifications. Instead, referring to a specific standard, for example, C++11 is more appropriate to members of the ISO/IEC 14882 community.
- CoastalCoder 4y agoConsider writing "C++1x" or "C++2x" instead.
- deterministic 4y agoYou forgot the trigger warning! There are people in the C++ culture that would be highly offended by such language. And who wants to see a grey beard cry silent tears while investigating yet another core dump? Note: I am a member of the C++ community and therefore have the credentials necessary to make fun of my culture. If you make fun of the C++ culture without being part of it then you are clearly in violation of new speak and a woke certified person will try to cancel you.
- hendrikrassmann 4y ago>You forgot the trigger warning! Bro, don't use that phrase. "The phrase can cause stress about what's to follow. Additionally, one can never know what may or may not trigger a particular person." Consider using "content note".
- deterministic 4y agoAhh your comment triggered me! And you forgot the “content note”!