4 ms·

> In reality, there is nothing wrong with C++, particularly not modern C++ (since c++11) as the approaches laid out in Stroustrup's book discourage writing C++

by zxcdw 12y ago

> In reality, there is nothing wrong with C++, particularly not modern C++ (since c++11) as the approaches laid out in Stroustrup's book discourage writing C++ in the old-fashioned "let's throw pointers around!" approach. So, in essence this would mean to many that Rusts safety focus happens too late for it to be a big enough benefit for having to give up the investment in modern C++? As in, memory safety is a solved problem with modern C++?

72deluxe 12y ago
Yes, modern C++ is far safer than the old style or passing pointers all over the place and wondering who was deleting them (not that I ever did that - you could pass const pointers to stop others deleting them anyway; it was only a problem if you didn't obey const-correctness and make certain classes "container" classes). The addition of move semantics and using references everywhere makes pointers unnecessary for the most part. You can use STL containers for putting your items into so shouldn't see raw "new" or "delete" operations in your own code very much; this is particularly true where you define your own move operators and move constructors. It's a difficult habit to break though! See Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language Fourth Edition" (the blue book) section 3.3.3 Resource Management and 3.2.1.2 "A Container", where in this early part of the book Stroustrup explicitly directs to 'avoid "naked" new and delete operations" and to "use resource handles and RAII to manage resources". See std::move to force moving where it isn't clear that you're moving things. Further reading: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/move_operator http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/move_operator http://stroustrup.com/C++11FAQ.html#default2 http://stroustrup.com/C++11FAQ.html#default2
- pjmlp 12y ago
  The sad reality that I came to realize from this year's CppCon is that most C++ developers out there will just keep on writing pre-C++98 code, due to multiple reasons like style guides, company policy, old code bases and so on. Only greefield projects can benefit from modern C++ and there are very few out there. After reading the updated version of Effective C++, I doubt the average C++ developer will be able to deal with a mixed codebase of pre-C++98, C++98, C++03, C++11 and C++14.
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    This is very true. I am writing new software for my dayjob but I am stuck with VC2010 on Windows. Despite having Xcode under Mac OS, I have to write old-fashioned C++ as VC2010 doesn't support anything new! But it helps to learn the new stuff and apply it within my own projects as best I can.

by zxcdw 12y ago

72deluxe 12y ago

Yes, modern C++ is far safer than the old style or passing pointers all over the place and wondering who was deleting them (not that I ever did that - you could pass const pointers to stop others deleting them anyway; it was only a problem if you didn't obey const-correctness and make certain classes "container" classes). The addition of move semantics and using references everywhere makes pointers unnecessary for the most part. You can use STL containers for putting your items into so shouldn't see raw "new" or "delete" operations in your own code very much; this is particularly true where you define your own move operators and move constructors. It's a difficult habit to break though! See Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language Fourth Edition" (the blue book) section 3.3.3 Resource Management and 3.2.1.2 "A Container", where in this early part of the book Stroustrup explicitly directs to 'avoid "naked" new and delete operations" and to "use resource handles and RAII to manage resources". See std::move to force moving where it isn't clear that you're moving things. Further reading: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/move_operator http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/move_operator http://stroustrup.com/C++11FAQ.html#default2 http://stroustrup.com/C++11FAQ.html#default2

pjmlp 12y ago
The sad reality that I came to realize from this year's CppCon is that most C++ developers out there will just keep on writing pre-C++98 code, due to multiple reasons like style guides, company policy, old code bases and so on. Only greefield projects can benefit from modern C++ and there are very few out there. After reading the updated version of Effective C++, I doubt the average C++ developer will be able to deal with a mixed codebase of pre-C++98, C++98, C++03, C++11 and C++14.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  This is very true. I am writing new software for my dayjob but I am stuck with VC2010 on Windows. Despite having Xcode under Mac OS, I have to write old-fashioned C++ as VC2010 doesn't support anything new! But it helps to learn the new stuff and apply it within my own projects as best I can.