Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
Do the conventions in a programming language such as in C++ (such as extraction operator >> ) can be changed by a developer? Or is it restricted?
You're asking two questions here.
Who makes the C++ Standard?
The C++ Standards Committee
Can I change the behavior of an operator such as operator>>?
Yes, you can, via a capability defined in the standard. See:
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/operators
What are the basic rules and idioms for operator overloading?
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
When I am reading design goals of C++11, it mentioned about zero-overhead principle without any examples or features which uses this principle. I can understand that it could be there to avoid degrading existing code performance. But,
Can someone explain this concept with some examples?
Approach they made to implement such a feature in the standard?
How they enforce compiler-writers to implement this?
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
What standards document(s) specify the behavior of the C and/or C++ pre-processors?
Wikipedia suggests http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/standards is valid for C99. Is it? What about C++ flavours?
The C language standard (ISO/IEC 9899) specifies how the preprocessor behaves in C.
The C++ standard (ISO/IEC 14882) specifies how the preprocessor behaves in C++.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
A well-known principle of good programming style says: "explicit is better than implicit". Don't inherited constructors go against this principle? (A single using statement that includes all the constructors of the base class isn't very explicit, is it?)
No, this principle is for explicit keyword with constructors and conversion operators, not for explicitely typing a lot of code. using won't change whether the constructors are explicit or implicit.
This principle is (as most principles in C++) also quite disputable and over-generalized.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm starting to read Alexandrescu's modern c++ design and I'm interested in following question. Are ideas described in this book still relevant with modern C++?
The ideas are certainly relevant and the principles and techniques Andrei describes are still valid. Probably some if not all the examples would be written differently now, to exploit language elements that were not available when he wrote the book.
Actually some of the ideas he presents in his book have been included in the current standard, even if in a different form.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I remember a while ago I heard that there were thoughts of including a BigInteger implementation in the c++0x standard(as it was called back then). Apparently this did not happen but I was wondering if this is planned as part of c++1y or not.
The unbounded integer library is being worked on in SG6, the Numerics study group. It will probably go into a Technical Specification (TS, what used to be called a TR) once we sort out a few things about its interface and about interoperability of library numeric types.
The latest official paper on the subject is N3542. It is not slated for inclusion in C++14.