SuperV1234

5 ms·

31.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
It is kind of weird at first but the reason is that `std::vector` requires heap allocation and transient allocations are not allowed in `constexpr` contexts. The purpose of `std::define_static_array` is to promote the storage of the vector
32.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
This cost is not significant nowadays, it's the frontend/parsing time. You can also use `#pragma once` which works everywhere, is nicer, and technically needs less work by the compiler, but compilers have optimized for include gua
33.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
It's a fair comparison. The parent comment isn't showing the compiler source code for the built-in reflection mechanisms. You won't have to care about ^^ and [:X:] if you just want to consume reflection-based utils, which was
34.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
C++: enum Color { red, green, blue }; auto name = to_enum_string(Color::Red); // "Red"
35.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
...so what? It's just a header you have to #include.
36.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
In short, it probes enum values in a pre-defined range (e.g. [-256; 256]), and parses the `__PRETTY_FUNCTION__` macro at compile-time to extract the name of the enumerator. Once you have that in place, you can easily detect duplicates, etc.
37.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
Logging, debugging, auto-generation of UIs/editors, etc... This is an extremely common operation and for a good reason.
38.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
It is "cryptic" and "ugly" to you just because you're not familiar with it. You'd pick the macro-based implementation because you are familiar with it. Seeing this argumentation is so tiresome, because it feels
39.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
Java reflection is another beast altogether as it is runtime reflection. C++26 reflection is purely compile-time , which not only means it adds zero runtime cost, but also prevents those kind-of-insane use cases you see in Java and C#.
40.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
I think this is a very bad take -- once you write it by hand you have to manually keep it in sync with the actual struct and ensure you made no mistakes. Reflection guarantees 1-1 future-proof mapping with the actual C++ struct, avoids boil
41.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
You can achieve that since C++20 (or C++17 if you don't care about the member names). E.g. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/vittorioromeo_cpp-gamedev-ref... (The link above shows ImGui generation, but the same exact
42.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
Nothing that makes it straightforward. Testing via `static_assert` is a good strategy, but it's not debugging. I believe there are some ways of printing custom diagnostics during compilation, but I am not aware of any step-by-step debu
43.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
We have been able to automatically do this since C++17: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/vittorioromeo_cpp-gamedev-ref...
44.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
You can already automatically serialize/deserialize arbitrarily nested structs since C++17 (using Boost.PFR). Since C++20, you can also serialize/deserialize the struct data member names automatically. For many useful use cases, y
45.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
That is true, but on the other hand Modules were standardized more than 6 years ago. Promises and claims have been made for longer than that on how Modules would have improved compilation times and made everyone's lives easier. In 2026
46.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
I explicitly mentioned that GCC 16.1 was the compiler used in the benchmarking section, do you think I also need to add a disclaimer in the conclusion section as well? Regardless, I don't think things are going to differ much with Clan
47.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
Author here. It isn't a clear "win" at all, there are tradeoffs to each approach.
48.
Cost of enum-to-string: C++26 reflection vs. the old ways(vittorioromeo.com)
3 points by SuperV1234 5mo ago|0 comments
49.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
It's not a good thing. The reasoning is extremely simple and I don't understand how can anyone oppose it: there are some operations that you don't want to forget BY DEFAULT. If I open a file, eventually I want to close it. If
50.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
> Only thing that goes for C++ [...] Nah, that's far from the only thing.
51.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
This already happens with -- e.g. -- Claude Code spawnining parallel agents and then collating their results.
52.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
Zig doesn't even have RAII...
53.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
Closely matches my own experiences with current SOTA AI. Extremely useful collaborator, far from being a replacement for human intelligence and creativity.
54.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
Not a fan of the nav, but loved the transitions. Applied them to my website (bespoke C++ static generator + template library): https://vittorioromeo.com/
55.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
This is the level of quality you can expect from `ruvnet` projects: https://github.com/deletexiumu/wifi-densepose As a very pro-AI person, this is exactly what I would define AI slop. --- The whole thing is a scam: ht
56.
by SuperV1234 5mo ago
We are not fundamentally different. Chemical reactions are just math.
57.
Stackless coroutines for gamedev in ~200 lines of C++(vittorioromeo.com)
6 points by SuperV1234 5mo ago|0 comments
58.
by SuperV1234 6mo ago
You'd have to review and verify even changes that you've written by hand. You might think that your hand-written code satisfies A+B+C+D+E, but until you've verified it, you cannot prove it. That's not any different fro
59.
by SuperV1234 6mo ago
Why don't you stop avoiding the actual question? Or perhaps you have nothing of substance to add?
60.
by SuperV1234 6mo ago
I understand that, I don't agree with the reasoning and I think it's illogical. Why am I not allowed to comment on it?

More ›