Only two types of people don't like C++. First is brainlets, second is functionalfags in their ivory towers

We get it, user, TMPfags have completely lost their minds.

Almost no popular programming language has a context-free grammar. No, not even C.

s-expressions are so lisps are
not sure if haskell uses pure t-expressions, probably not

I mean, we should have stopped long ago. Now I'm just curious how far will this shit go, with the language getting an update every 3 years.

PHP is the most beautiful, but most programmers aren't chad enough to appreciate her.

I never in my life bumped into problem in C++ where i would think "oh shit, I'm so happy we have templates, I don't know what I would do without them", but I'm forced to use them nonetheless. I really like C++ even though it's becoming this retarded monster with every new standard but at least it opened my eyes and I started to use different languages if they were suited for the solution of problem better.

What does this even do?
t. a C fag

You've never used a vector or a string? what about sorting? All of those things are/use templates.

>there is no way you can make vector or string without templates

>HER

It's the same as the current for_each in the stl, but used on views (lazy ranges, like Haskell's). Only the last three lines actually do something, the others are about constraining the template argument types.

the fuck

I mean, it would be nice to have proper generics. For this I do believe Rust is an improvement, but at the same time is not as powerful in other areas.

php 5 is a she
...I think 7 is a trap.

brainlet here, can confirm.
C++ is still the fourth most popular language. At least admit you're a brainlet like me, stop making up excuses

php beeing only horrific

To make a container class like vector without templates would require you to do one of two things:
1. Use void pointers under the hood, incurring a small performance penalty as you typecast everywhere.
2. Literally copy and paste the same code multiple times changing only the types, for every type you wish to use it for.

Templates are handled at compile time, which makes it better than option 1, and require's far less lines of code compared to option 2. Only a brainlet would fail to understand this.

>static and dynamic dispatch
it has names, you know

You forgot Rustlets.

>C++ommon Lisp
>Beautiful, readable

OOP people are not the ones that will ascend to heaven in the judgement day. Functional programmers are.

I can't imagine the nightmare that writing a C++ compiler must be.

Yeah I know. Having the programmer explicitly tell the compiler what to do makes things so much harder compared to a language where everything has to be inferred.

Sepples is pure insanity. There's a talk by Gor about the work that went into optimizing coroutines for clang. And that is just a single feature from the upcoming std.

to be fair it does, in the second case you can push all that to execution time and say "lol it's the programmer's problem now"

Common Lisp looks no different than other lisps aside from small details since it's a LISP 2. LISPs in general have one of the most consistent syntax's, short of clojure, you can ask for. If you can't read them then you're simply retarded.

Being a Lisp 2 makes it ugly, but so does its retarded naming conventions.
Schemes are infinitely more readable.

C++ template metaprogramming is a turing complete pure functional language evaluated at compile time, you can even implement lisp in it.
It triggers functionaltards because they're brainlets who just can't deal with mixing paradigms.

Every language is good, for some use ofcourse. Beyond php. Php is shit

I dont like the aesthetics of

Jesus christ you can already do this in Rust with more speed and way more readability.

>C++
>functional
>ivory tower
C++ syntax is anything but beautiful. What would make you say that OOP C is functional

Even php creator regard it as a messy tumor