2 ms·
> but it really does reduce code readability. How about not specifying the type, and letting the compiler infer it correctly and error out when it cannot - lik
by BeetleB 2y ago
> but it really does reduce code readability.
How about not specifying the type, and letting the compiler infer it correctly and error out when it cannot - like so many other languages do? And those languages are much stricter about types than C++.
And auto reducing code readability? Having to figure out the intricacies of a detailed type to write was a huge barrier, and virtually anyone reading the code with a type involving several nested angle brackets would not bother mentally parsing it anyway.
- Leherenn 2y agoI think it does reduce readability in some scenarios. For instance: const auto& processes = getCurrentlyRunningProcesses(); for (const auto& process: processes) { // Ok, what do I do with process now? Is it a pair from a map? A struct from a vector? // If it's a pair from a map, is the key the pid, a unique id, something else? } std::unordered_map<Pid, ProcessData> is more readable than auto here IMO: you don't need to open the definition (or hope your IDE correctly display the type).