4 ms·

God, C++ even today is still horribly verbose. I get that being "explicit" is being "better" but there are limits. Even after auto removed a lot of verbosity th

God, C++ even today is still horribly verbose. I get that being "explicit" is being "better" but there are limits. Even after auto removed a lot of verbosity there still is a lot there just to get it to do exactly what you want.

nikbackm 4y ago
What is verbose about that? (The first case, not the second, special case) Seems hard to make it any shorter. Well, I guess you could remove "const" if you want.
jeroenhd 4y ago
Here's how it looks when you write readable C++: for (const auto &[x, y]: zip(a, subrange(begin(b), unreachable_sentinel))) { /* Do something with x and y */ } I'm not sure why C++ programmers don't like using `using`, it's as if Java programmers insist on typing out java.util.ArrayList every time because you may have an ArrayList of your own in the future. So much C++ code can become readable by adding `using namespace std::something`.
- cmovq 4y ago
  The reason is header files. If you do `using namespace std::something` in one file and it gets included in another, the other file now has std::something in the global namespace which it may not have excepted. Other languages like Java have imports scoped a to a single file, so this is not a problem.
  - jeroenhd 4y ago
    I see, but that's only a program in header files, isn't it? Most code will end up in .cpp files which don't get included (usually). It makes sense to use std::vector in a .h(pp) file, but in the .cpp you should be able to `using namespace std`, right?
    - chongli 4y ago
      Most code will end up in .cpp files which don't get included (usually). Not if a lot of your code is in the form of templates. You have to put those in headers.
      - dcow 4y ago
        At this point, just use a modern language already d=
      - pjmlp 4y ago
        Not when using modules.
  - titzer 4y ago
    The word "antiquated" comes to mind, but it's worse than that. An age-old self-created fractal hell of dumb problems created by a simplistic view of code reuse based on the simple mechanism of text inclusion that constantly restrains future evolution. It's antediluvian and just plain backwards.
    - twic 4y ago
      We are at least getting modules real soon now: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/modules https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/modules
      - xigoi 4y ago
        We've been getting them real soon for… about 5 years now?
        ninkendo 4y ago
        They were supposed to be part of C++11, back when it was called C++0x, before getting punted. So more like almost 20 years now (since some time after C++03.)
        pjmlp 4y ago
        Java is still trying to get value types. Some things take time when trying to avoid Python 2 / 3 scenarios.
        xigoi 4y ago
        The Python 2/3 scenario was because of breaking backward compatibility, which is not the case for C++ modules.
      - duped 4y ago
        The only compiler that seems to care about implementing modules is MSVC. It'll be "real soon" when GCC stops crashing.
  - tragomaskhalos 4y ago
    Using in a header file => complete no-no. Using in a cpp file => absolutely fine.
    - jcelerier 4y ago
      > Using in a cpp file => absolutely fine. definitely not as soon as you want to do unity/jumbo builds (which are in my experience the n°1 thing to do to get fast CI builds)
  - lenkite 4y ago
    It should be completely fine to use `using namespace std` inside a function body right ?
- twic 4y ago
  C++ doesn't have a lot of namespacing below 'std', so if you go around using everything you need, you end up with a lot of short, possibly conflicting names in scope. Java avoids this somewhat because functions are always in a class, so there is a little bit of extra namespacing, even if you've imported the class.
  - winrid 4y ago
    You can still import fully qualified static method on a class: import someclass.doThing; Or maybe that's what you meant by somewhat :)
  - gautamdivgi 4y ago
    Don’t the boost libraries use a bunch of namespacing? And I think you need boost to be decently useful in c++.
- cutler 4y ago
  I see the same thing in PHP. Example code full of inline namespace-qualified paths and a lot of array() instead of [] as if nothing changed since PHP4.
- jcul 4y ago
  In an actual .cpp compilation unit, I'd probably write it like that. In a header it's generally advised to not add using namespaces. However, I appreciate the grandparent comment including the namespaces in the example, so I can see exactly where things are coming from.
pdntspa 4y ago
I don't do C++ but if it's anyting like my Java IDE most of that stuff pops up in autocomplete and you just tab through it all

nikbackm 4y ago

What is verbose about that? (The first case, not the second, special case) Seems hard to make it any shorter. Well, I guess you could remove "const" if you want.

jeroenhd 4y ago

Here's how it looks when you write readable C++: for (const auto &[x, y]: zip(a, subrange(begin(b), unreachable_sentinel))) { /* Do something with x and y */ } I'm not sure why C++ programmers don't like using `using`, it's as if Java programmers insist on typing out java.util.ArrayList every time because you may have an ArrayList of your own in the future. So much C++ code can become readable by adding `using namespace std::something`.

cmovq 4y ago
The reason is header files. If you do `using namespace std::something` in one file and it gets included in another, the other file now has std::something in the global namespace which it may not have excepted. Other languages like Java have imports scoped a to a single file, so this is not a problem.
- jeroenhd 4y ago
  I see, but that's only a program in header files, isn't it? Most code will end up in .cpp files which don't get included (usually). It makes sense to use std::vector in a .h(pp) file, but in the .cpp you should be able to `using namespace std`, right?
  - chongli 4y ago
    Most code will end up in .cpp files which don't get included (usually). Not if a lot of your code is in the form of templates. You have to put those in headers.
    - dcow 4y ago
      At this point, just use a modern language already d=
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      Not when using modules.
- titzer 4y ago
  The word "antiquated" comes to mind, but it's worse than that. An age-old self-created fractal hell of dumb problems created by a simplistic view of code reuse based on the simple mechanism of text inclusion that constantly restrains future evolution. It's antediluvian and just plain backwards.
  - twic 4y ago
    We are at least getting modules real soon now: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/modules https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/modules
    - xigoi 4y ago
      We've been getting them real soon for… about 5 years now?
      - ninkendo 4y ago
        They were supposed to be part of C++11, back when it was called C++0x, before getting punted. So more like almost 20 years now (since some time after C++03.)
        pjmlp 4y ago
        Java is still trying to get value types. Some things take time when trying to avoid Python 2 / 3 scenarios.
        xigoi 4y ago
        The Python 2/3 scenario was because of breaking backward compatibility, which is not the case for C++ modules.
    - duped 4y ago
      The only compiler that seems to care about implementing modules is MSVC. It'll be "real soon" when GCC stops crashing.
- tragomaskhalos 4y ago
  Using in a header file => complete no-no. Using in a cpp file => absolutely fine.
  - jcelerier 4y ago
    > Using in a cpp file => absolutely fine. definitely not as soon as you want to do unity/jumbo builds (which are in my experience the n°1 thing to do to get fast CI builds)
- lenkite 4y ago
  It should be completely fine to use `using namespace std` inside a function body right ?
twic 4y ago
C++ doesn't have a lot of namespacing below 'std', so if you go around using everything you need, you end up with a lot of short, possibly conflicting names in scope. Java avoids this somewhat because functions are always in a class, so there is a little bit of extra namespacing, even if you've imported the class.
- winrid 4y ago
  You can still import fully qualified static method on a class: import someclass.doThing; Or maybe that's what you meant by somewhat :)
- gautamdivgi 4y ago
  Don’t the boost libraries use a bunch of namespacing? And I think you need boost to be decently useful in c++.
cutler 4y ago
I see the same thing in PHP. Example code full of inline namespace-qualified paths and a lot of array() instead of [] as if nothing changed since PHP4.
jcul 4y ago
In an actual .cpp compilation unit, I'd probably write it like that. In a header it's generally advised to not add using namespaces. However, I appreciate the grandparent comment including the namespaces in the example, so I can see exactly where things are coming from.

pdntspa 4y ago

I don't do C++ but if it's anyting like my Java IDE most of that stuff pops up in autocomplete and you just tab through it all