torrent

6 ms·

1.
by torrent 3y ago
Seems to be a similiar problem field as writing blocking functions that call async functions in C# and co-existence of synchronous and asynchronous code. There are numerous recommendations such as https://learn.microsoft.com&#x2F
2.
by torrent 3y ago
Sad perspective for C programmers who need to wait 10+ years until they get half-backen versions of some useful C++ features.
3.
by torrent 4y ago
> why people literally do not and cannot get it right 100% of the time. Thinking so is pure hubris. Sure we all don't get it right 100% on the first write. For this reason we test and iterate. Equally you could say that it is pure h
4.
by torrent 4y ago
I think it would be more constructive to propose a constrained subset, get rid of legacy, propose default behaviours for parts that are undefined and so on. Stuff that does not belong to this subset can still be used within an unconstrained
5.
by torrent 4y ago
Syntax is mostly a matter of taste. Preference of taste and style changes with time and trends. Why should "let name : type" be preferred to "type name"? Just because others do it? Why and this unnecessary, additional &#
6.
by torrent 4y ago
> I mean, the almost-simplest abstraction possible the std::vector has potential UB right in its [] operator. It's your responsibility to pass the allowed range of value to a function. It a function description tells you to e.g. pas
7.
by torrent 5y ago
having segfault is the best you can have: it tells you explicitly that something is wrong with your program. in other languages the same kind of error may result in stale data and the GC does not collect the data and the memory consumption
8.
by torrent 5y ago
After your battle with the compiler is over and it compiles it does not mean your program is correct! If you now what you you have no issues with C++. It's not the language. It's the design, approach and attitude
9.
by torrent 5y ago
The typical, well known blog pattern for writing against C++: Show some buggy code an then conclude that C++ is wrong. Instead of asking: Who is wrong, the programmer trying to speak the language or the language itself? As always: Only use
10.
by torrent 13y ago
Hateing the idea of array of arraya is like hating recursivity.
11.
by torrent 13y ago
I dont know which operations you are going to do with the arrays but what about just use a array of arrays or matrices of matrices of matrices of...?