Reputation
619
Top tag
Next privilege 1,000 Rep.
See votes, expandable usercard
Badges
8 10
Newest
 Quorum
Impact
~30k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 8 helpful flags
  • 629 votes cast
May
11
comment Using C++ but not using the language's specific features, should switch to C?
@AareP Of course the source code is ugly, it has to be tuned for maximum flexibility and performace (which your clean implementation does surely not achieve as successfully as the standard library)! But you know what, you're not supposed to use the source code of those implementations anyway.
May
11
comment Using C++ but not using the language's specific features, should switch to C?
+1 Some time ago I had to write a library to be used in another C project and I thought it was a good idea to also implement it in C, man what a stupid idiot I was back then.
May
11
comment Using C++ but not using the language's specific features, should switch to C?
@Lohoris You don't need a citation for common sense. In which way should C be more performant than C++?
May
11
comment Using C++ but not using the language's specific features, should switch to C?
The question is not what you don't use/need from C++ (although I guess you would indeed need it if you knew it better, but that aside), but what C would actually buy you in addition to C++, which is just nothing (no, not even performance). It would be only so that you can say "I'm writing real C and not some strange wannabe C++", but since C++ is a multiparadigm language anyway, this is just no argument. If you don't need/want OOP or generic programming, then don't use it, nobody is punishing you for not using the complete feature set of C++.
May
11
comment What are the roles of singletons, abstract classes and interfaces?
One manager is indeed more than enough ;)
Mar
20
comment what is message passing in OO?
More or less just "method calling" in the usual sophisticated OO-slang ;)
Mar
8
comment C++ Renaissance - marketing slogan?
@JonHarrop No, only partly, given the context (see my last sentence). And it's definitely not wrong either.
Mar
8
comment C++ Renaissance - marketing slogan?
@JonHarrop I wouldn't argue with him if the immediately preceding sentence said: "features C++ had since long ago have only just come to .NET languages, like arithmetic". The meaningfulness of this (as C++ predates .NET, anyway) is another question, but he obviously is right and obviously didn't mean arithmeitc in general. And also the meaningfulness gains much quality when somebody else likes to argue that .NET languages have many nice features, like arithmetic (which doesn't imply the OP did, but many do).
Mar
8
comment C++ Renaissance - marketing slogan?
@JonHarrop You don't really get the context, do you? And no, I don't mean you don't ever get any context. My comment is meant in the context of the above discussion.
Feb
27
comment What are good strategies in C for dealing with pointer errors of this type?
@Adel Sorry, it may have been a bit harsh, but I just couldn't get the point of this question in any way.
Feb
27
comment What are good strategies in C for dealing with pointer errors of this type?
Huh? Just don't make such errors. And if you did, be happy the compiler found it and correct it. What else do you want to hear? Don't use C? But well, another language doesn't completely protect you from the burden of actually understanding what you do.
Feb
20
answered If Instance is for Class, what's for Template?
Feb
17
comment Are utility classes with nothing but static members an anti-pattern in C++?
@JanHudec Yeah, good points. I was more after the argument that you cannot create templated namespaces, which can come in handy when encapsulating a bunch of type-consistent functions and/or classes (e.g. a mathematics module templated on the type of real numbers). Other than this I'm completely on the namespaces-over-static-classes side.
Feb
11
comment Are utility classes with nothing but static members an anti-pattern in C++?
+1 Templates are indeed a point where namespaces still lack features.
Feb
11
comment Are utility classes with nothing but static members an anti-pattern in C++?
Short answer: You just don't need a class to wrap these functions. Free functions are a much cleaner fit for your task than crunching them into some pseudo-OO construct, which is a workaround you only need in "purely-OO" languages.
Feb
2
revised Private variable vs property?
deleted 20 characters in body
Feb
2
comment Determining the right amount of documentation
Whereas it is indeed a good idea to avoid too much documentation, your boss just does it for all the wrong reasons.
Feb
2
answered Private variable vs property?
Jan
17
comment Source control workflow for managing a software platform
It may still be a better fit on programmers.se, but I'm not sure about that.
Dec
8
comment Do I really need oop for my kind of job? After 10 years I think I don't
@user20358 Though I don't know if he's Romanian, I guess it's Alexandrescu's "Modern C++ Design", which at it's time was a groundbreaker, regarding templates and their possible use-cases.