I've read those books.
I've read those books. I have a lot of respect for the authors, and they have a lot of good advice. But Exceptional C++ made me not want to deal with C++ exceptions, ever. If getting C++ code correct in the face of exceptions is that bloody hard, then the language is broken. I'm convinced that cobbling up an "int" equivalent type that is exception safe is a pyrrhic endeavor that will be a continual source of fragility in production code. Alexandrescu's Modern C++ Design made me want to forget that templates ever existed. The entire second half of that book I kept saying to myself, "If I'm on a project with someone actually checking stuff like that in, one of us is going to have to leave." Fortunately I've yet to run into those kinds of template metaprogramming games in the wild. Good programmers seem to abhor them. [Edit: Actually, I remember a bunch of stuff in Modern COM that used templates very heavily. Essentially impervious to debugging; that stuff sucked hard] More recent C++ design decisions are better than the ones the committees made in the 90s and early 2000s. But the successful teams I've seen all practice restraint and keep things debuggable by limiting the amount of magic going on under the hood, regardless of what the committees have been pushing. The Google C++ standards (and others that were independently created and haven't been seen much outside their own development cultures) may be "dated", but they remain an indictment of the design of C++.
Posted by kabdib on May 21, 2015, 12:42 PM
Tags
Related issues
- [BUG] Cowork (Windows): all Plan9 shares fail with "Plan9 mount failed: invalid argument" after Windows update KB5124008 (26200.9445) — uninstalling the KB fixe
- Feature Request: Auto-resume CLI session when usage limit resets
- Please deobfuscate the Python
- [Bug] MLX version of Gemma 4 26B fails to load: "Model type gemma4 not supported" (macOS)
- # 233 Developers Discussed Abandoning the Office Add-in Platform — An Open Letter on the Office.js Stability, Security & Trust Crisis
- [FEATURE] Allow users to configure which shell the Bash tool uses or inherit initial shell
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.6,500 issues0 comments
reliability (Software)
[BUG] Cowork (Windows): all Plan9 shares fail with "Plan9 mount failed: invalid argument" after Windows update KB5124008 (26200.9445) — uninstalling the KB fixe
Feature Request: Auto-resume CLI session when usage limit resets
Please deobfuscate the Python
[Bug] MLX version of Gemma 4 26B fails to load: "Model type gemma4 not supported" (macOS)
# 233 Developers Discussed Abandoning the Office Add-in Platform — An Open Letter on the Office.js Stability, Security & Trust Crisis
[FEATURE] Allow users to configure which shell the Bash tool uses or inherit initial shell
Admin Materials and Surfaces
AMD Support
I've read those books.
I've read those books. I have a lot of respect for the authors, and they have a lot of good advice. But Exceptional C++ made me not want to deal with C++ exceptions, ever. If getting C++ code correct in the face of exceptions is that bloody hard, then the language is broken. I'm convinced that cobbling up an "int" equivalent type that is exception safe is a pyrrhic endeavor that will be a continual source of fragility in production code. Alexandrescu's Modern C++ Design made me want to forget that templates ever existed. The entire second half of that book I kept saying to myself, "If I'm on a project with someone actually checking stuff like that in, one of us is going to have to leave." Fortunately I've yet to run into those kinds of template metaprogramming games in the wild. Good programmers seem to abhor them. [Edit: Actually, I remember a bunch of stuff in Modern COM that used templates very heavily. Essentially impervious to debugging; that stuff sucked hard] More recent C++ design decisions are better than the ones the committees made in the 90s and early 2000s. But the successful teams I've seen all practice restraint and keep things debuggable by limiting the amount of magic going on under the hood, regardless of what the committees have been pushing. The Google C++ standards (and others that were independently created and haven't been seen much outside their own development cultures) may be "dated", but they remain an indictment of the design of C++.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.