Was everything after C++98 a mistake?
Was everything after C++98 a mistake?
Chase Stewart
Other urls found in this thread:
stroustrup.com
twitter.com
Julian Murphy
everything before c++11 was a mistake.
Logan Edwards
No.
Grayson Peterson
Fpbp. I started getting into programming not too long after C++11 came out. I learned C first, and I realized C++11 is a godsend compared to what it was before.
Christopher Thomas
FPBP
C++ before C++11 was an absolute nightmare, see Linus Torvalds' rants about it from back then.
Dominic Gomez
Did he commend C++ 11 and the newer standards or something?
Jordan Phillips
He hasn't made a public comment about C++ in over 10 years, so no.
Isaiah Brown
wait he reproduced???
Gabriel Gomez
It's not the correct Terry Davis.
Eli Perry
>learned C++ in school as basically C with classes and STL
>doing a project to get myself up to date on everything
>all these fucking godsend features I never used
everyone ive ever worked/interviewed with probably thinks I'm an animal
Kayden Stewart
same for me one year ago. got to learn to use the new features on an internship.
the new features make so many things easier and the code cleaner, and all people who complain about them are too dumb to use them anyway
Michael Kelly
But the modern standards have only made the language more complex.
Isaiah Brooks
>But the modern standards have only made the language more complex.
Actually, it hasn't. More features != more complex.
It has streamlined how to write efficient and correct sepples.
Jose Sanchez
Why do people use "sepples"? Can someone explain?
Jordan Moore
Unironically this, C++ after C++11 is actually quite nice to use and feels more "solid".
Elijah Russell
C++ is too hard to write
Nathaniel Adams
It's a joke that is as old as me. It's a pun on "see plus plus".
Joseph Nelson
I've always pronounced it as "sep-ples"
Charles Morgan
>The foundation begun in C++11 is not yet complete, and C++17 did little to make our
foundation more solid, regular, and complete. Instead, it added significant surface complexity
and increased the number of features people need to learn. C++ could crumble under the
weight of these – mostly not quite fully
-baked – proposals. We should not spend most our time creating increasingly complicated facilities for experts, such as ourselves.
>We need a reasonably coherent language that can be used by “ordinary programmers” whose
main concern is to ship great applications on time.
>We now have about 150 cooks; that’s not a
good way to get a tasty and balanced meal.
We are on the path to something that could destroy C++. We must get off that path!
Evan Butler
Friendly reminder that Bjarne thinks that C++ is missing a Java-style garbage collector.
Ryder Anderson
Friendly reminder that the ISO C++ committee wants to make 2d graphics part of the standard library
>P0267
Sebastian Walker
And it was rejected/postponed.
Colton Allen
everything after c89 was a mistake.
Michael Morgan
C11 is good.
Anthony Harris
That's too bad, portable 2d graphics would have been awesome.
Jackson Price
no, everything after ANSI C was a mistake