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.
Related
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 4 months ago.
Improve this question
I found this great answer from 12 years ago that explains the copy-and-swap idiom and how to implement it in C++11 and C++03.
My question is: is this still the recommended solution or has it changed in later versions of C++? (specifically I'm currently using C++20)
If you need safety and comfort over performance, it is still best solution. Howard Hinnant recommends you roll your own but only if you really really know how to do it and really really need the last ounce of performance.
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 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm currently self-studying C++ and I'm about to finish my OOP course, till now, I've finished the OOP concepts but the course also includes an introduction to the STL, but I feel like it's too early to have a look on the STL at this stage(before studying Data Structures).
Is it a good idea to skip the last part of the OOP course and start studying Data Structures right now? or should I complete the course anyway?
In my opinion, if you already can understand OOP principles you should use STL and do not care how it really works under the hood, but after that, you should learn basic data structures and all will come clear for you.
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 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I was seeing this Herb Sutter talk. C++ is changing so much, and backward compatibility is becoming such a pain. Wouldn't it be better to just create a NEW language with just the good new stuff of C++, which doesn't have to maintain backward compatibility?
I do not intend to start a flame war here. This is an objective question: Are there any initiatives out there that are trying to create a new language based on the good new features of C++, but forgetting about the backward compatibility?
On Quora: http://qr.ae/RS2k2L
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 was reading this post: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1025494/obfuscating-c-c-code
The question is:
What tools are available to obfuscate C/C++ code....
An answer which had a bounty awarded to it says:
Follow the Standard insanely.
That'll be enough :)
I don't understand why people say following the standard would produce unreadable code or is impossible. Can someone explain what people mean in that post ? I'm a beginner programmer (in C / 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 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.