3 ms·

Yeah, Effective Modern C++ has always read like a list of warnings. C++ is kind of like Python in that the design of the language does not steer you into making

Yeah, Effective Modern C++ has always read like a list of warnings. C++ is kind of like Python in that the design of the language does not steer you into making good, idiomatic decisions. No one is going to guess most of the stuff that is taught in that book without reading it first from working with the language or reading other people's code, and really a full list of such things for C++ could be many hundreds or even thousands. I also agree that the new features seem to embrace and extend the "footgun-ness" of C++, rather than attempt to fix it.

DougBTX 3y ago
Which book would be the equivalent to an Effective Modern Python?
- bowsamic 3y ago
  I'm not aware of one, since Python changes quite a bit more quickly than C++.
- mixedmath 3y ago
  Probably Fluent Python comes the closest, I would say.
- sn9 3y ago
  Effective Python probably: https://effectivepython.com/ https://effectivepython.com/
PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
> the design of the language does not steer you into making good, idiomatic decisions. That's much easier to do when the tasks that the language is suitable for are bounded in some way. There are not many common idioms that are going to be shared (beyong libstdc++) between a realtime audio processing application and a data visualization backend for the web and an embedded system control app and a payroll processing backend.
- bowsamic 3y ago
  I don't agree. I can think of many languages that obfuscate their idioms that have bounded applicability. Obviously I already mentioned Python, which is obviously bounded to less performant applications (unless you call C code), but another one is SQL. For example, Azure SQL is extremely slow when using sub queries compared to CTEs, but the language does not make this apparent in its design. An example of a language with a smaller domain which makes its idioms obvious through its design is Ruby. An example of a high-performance language that can be used for all those things that makes its idioms obvious through its design is Rust. Another would be, imo, C. > There are not many common idioms that are going to be shared (beyong libstdc++) between a realtime audio processing application and a data visualization backend for the web and an embedded system control app and a payroll processing backend. I also just generally have to disagree with it, but you seem to be using a different definition of idiom to me. From what you said here, you seem to take idiom to be synonymous with "design decision". For me, an idiom is a specific semantic construct, possibly associated with specific syntax, that achieves a specific basic programming task. For example, the idiomatic way to loop with an index in Python is to use enumerate. It's merely the way that most people do the basic things, in a way that is actually good to do. C++ is infamous for a huge number of people using the language dangerously, to the point where there are effectively no idioms outside of specialist communities, and to find them out you need to read books. A significant amount of the basic design of the language needs to be ignored for most purposes.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
    One of the main places I see idioms in other languages is in dealing with containers (and there are some very nice ones). Python in particular, but others too. Slicing, splicing, iterating, mutating, map-reduce etc. etc. While I wouldn't say no to having such idioms available in C++ as language constructs, it is important that C++ continues to provide the lowest level that it can for such tasks (e.g. pointers into arrays or other buffers), and probably the level right above that (libstdc++). Similarly for threads (or more generally, parallel and asynchronous programming) - some other languages make available some really nice idioms for expressing these things, but again it is important for performance and control reasons that C++ continues to provide the current lowest level of access for this (basically a wrapper around pthreads). While things like promises, futures and coprocessing are really useful, they are often inappropriate for highly performant code.

DougBTX 3y ago

Which book would be the equivalent to an Effective Modern Python?

bowsamic 3y ago
I'm not aware of one, since Python changes quite a bit more quickly than C++.
mixedmath 3y ago
Probably Fluent Python comes the closest, I would say.
sn9 3y ago
Effective Python probably: https://effectivepython.com/ https://effectivepython.com/

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago

> the design of the language does not steer you into making good, idiomatic decisions. That's much easier to do when the tasks that the language is suitable for are bounded in some way. There are not many common idioms that are going to be shared (beyong libstdc++) between a realtime audio processing application and a data visualization backend for the web and an embedded system control app and a payroll processing backend.

bowsamic 3y ago
I don't agree. I can think of many languages that obfuscate their idioms that have bounded applicability. Obviously I already mentioned Python, which is obviously bounded to less performant applications (unless you call C code), but another one is SQL. For example, Azure SQL is extremely slow when using sub queries compared to CTEs, but the language does not make this apparent in its design. An example of a language with a smaller domain which makes its idioms obvious through its design is Ruby. An example of a high-performance language that can be used for all those things that makes its idioms obvious through its design is Rust. Another would be, imo, C. > There are not many common idioms that are going to be shared (beyong libstdc++) between a realtime audio processing application and a data visualization backend for the web and an embedded system control app and a payroll processing backend. I also just generally have to disagree with it, but you seem to be using a different definition of idiom to me. From what you said here, you seem to take idiom to be synonymous with "design decision". For me, an idiom is a specific semantic construct, possibly associated with specific syntax, that achieves a specific basic programming task. For example, the idiomatic way to loop with an index in Python is to use enumerate. It's merely the way that most people do the basic things, in a way that is actually good to do. C++ is infamous for a huge number of people using the language dangerously, to the point where there are effectively no idioms outside of specialist communities, and to find them out you need to read books. A significant amount of the basic design of the language needs to be ignored for most purposes.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
  One of the main places I see idioms in other languages is in dealing with containers (and there are some very nice ones). Python in particular, but others too. Slicing, splicing, iterating, mutating, map-reduce etc. etc. While I wouldn't say no to having such idioms available in C++ as language constructs, it is important that C++ continues to provide the lowest level that it can for such tasks (e.g. pointers into arrays or other buffers), and probably the level right above that (libstdc++). Similarly for threads (or more generally, parallel and asynchronous programming) - some other languages make available some really nice idioms for expressing these things, but again it is important for performance and control reasons that C++ continues to provide the current lowest level of access for this (basically a wrapper around pthreads). While things like promises, futures and coprocessing are really useful, they are often inappropriate for highly performant code.