3 ms·

I don't know how much experienced you are with modern C++, but the language has in fact evolved to be more usable and high level :)

• evincarofautumn 13y ago
  More usable, yes. Usable, no. I’ve been working in C++ for about ten years, since a couple years after I started programming. It’s certainly gotten better over time—particularly in terms of containers and ownership semantics—but it’s still not good exactly. For instance, it’s possible for mortals to write exception-safe code now, but still not memory-safe code. I spend an inordinate of time language-lawyering for my coworkers to avoid future debugging hell, and though in my opinion I don’t even know the standard all that well, I’m certainly among maybe a few dozen people at my company who come close to knowing it in full. It’s just an absurd source of artificial expertise that needs to die.
  • 5hoom 13y ago
    What problems have you found trying to write memory safe code? It seems to me that you barely have to think about memory ownership anymore ever since unique_ptr and shared_ptr came along.
    • evincarofautumn 13y ago
      I suppose my main gripes are that moving is not free, you can reuse moved-from objects, and there is no story for checked borrowing of unique_ptrs—you have to use raw pointers or weaken the ownership semantics to shared_ptr so that you can use weak_ptr for safe borrowing. Not to mention that shared_ptr is often semantically questionable and used as an inefficient alternative to a garbage collector.
      • 5hoom 13y ago
        Fair enough, good answer :)
  • yati 12y ago
    Yes, even I kind of agree that the language still has loads of baggage(read: warts) it could do without. "artificial expertise" got me thinking for a while, frankly :) Also, I think Rust has kind of nailed ownership semantics - makes my life a lot easier when the compiler assists me with those things.