The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
A question in the C++ forum today led me to C++ conformance improvements in Visual Studio 2019 | Microsoft Docs[^]. It seems to me that C++ is getting more and more complex and only a select few (some of whom are regulars here) will understand and be able to use these features. So I have to wonder who benefits from them, apart from the compiler writers who will definitely keep their jobs.
I'm with you. There isn't much beyond C++11 that I've found use for, at least so far. C++17 added <filesystem>, and C++20 added useful functions to atomic_flag. There's still nothing for sockets, but there's no end of pedantic crap.
Many systems will have platform-specific targets for things that have since been standardized. They won't bother to move to a version of C++ that supports them, because it would likely entail some rework.
One of the "improvements" I find really complicated is the range operator.
name = "My name is Sander Rossel".Substring(11);
name = "My name is Sander Rossel"[11..];
Now tell me, which line of code better conveys my purpose?
Pattern matching is nice, but should be rarely needed in proper OOP.
Exception ex = new Exception();
// The alternative is, of course, an if-else statement.var exType = ex.GetType();
if (exType == typeof(InvalidCastException))
elseif (exType == typeof(InvalidOperationException))
There's probably an advantage to the pattern matching, but it doesn't do much for readability.
Which code better conveys your purpose? The second.
Using ranges in Python for the last five million yeasrs, it is a joy to see them in C#. The only thing to remember, as in most languages that use slices and ranges, in [start..end] is that "end" is a stop and is not included in the range.
Both give us "Hello" rom  to  stopping at .
You beat me to it chris, I was just about to say exactly the same thing.
Myself and a colleague, where talking about this the other day, and basically came to the conclusion that all languages now have to take this approach, simply to appease the 15 minute attention span of the instant feedback generation.
Yes, it will keep on trucking for a long time. I have seen way too many attempts at using C++ for embedded applications that only use a subset of what C++ can do. And when you objectively ( pun indented ) it just makes you wonder what the point was of using C++ instead of C. Managers of any kind are a very bad idea to begin with.
Hm, as an embedded system designer/programmer (now retired), I used C++ for most of my programing in the last 15 years of my career. Using templates for things like FIFOs, queues, digital oscillators, filter parts, etc made my code cleaner and easier to write. I did stay away from dynamic object creation/destruction and I didn't use C++ exceptions.
They are probably applicable to less than 5% of developers? But you still have to search for things like JPEG and PNG encoders and decoders, which will affect far more than that 5%. This perplexes me, even though I heard their reasons for it long ago... C# kicks its butt because of items like that.
Fortunately, you don't have to use the new constructs.
Personally, I find a lot of new things being introduced to be counter-productive so I don't bother using them and I generally avoid code that does. That's because it defeats the purpose as far as I'm concerned. Herb keeps saying they are making the language more concise but I really couldn't care less about that because I see no advantages to that. If I have to stop and think about what some new construct does that is not helpful. I'll take the old, verbose ways that are simple and easy to understand.
Of newer things, I have found only one from C++17 that I use frequently: inline static initializers. That's one of the most useful things I have found in quite a while. This may be an "old dog-new tricks" thing with me but I am not asking for any new tricks because the old ones are working pretty well as far as I'm concerned.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
If I have to stop and think about what some new construct does that is not helpful. I'll take the old, verbose ways that are simple and easy to understand.
Thank god that you and @GregUtas are saying that...
I now feel less dumb
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
I believe code should read like a story. It makes for maintainability which is my primary concern. Very often the C# developers seem to believe that minimum typing is the objective of the language and add things that remove from the story. Choose what your priority is. I hate these stupid new features that hide what the story is saying. It's like a conversation with an idiot. You have no idea what they are saying.
When you look at a list of C++ changes in isolation, and without any motivating commentary they look hopelessly esoteric and unimportant. My experience with modern C++ features is that one day you will be looking for a way to solve a problem, and suddenly it will hit you, "Ah ha! That's what < feature X> is for."
C++ is becoming a very complex language. But the things added to C++ are put there by a bunch of really smart people who are experienced developers. It all has a purpose.
I actually haven't learned anything new since C++ 2003
I still look at C++ as C with objects, so for me it hasn't needed updating since it's standardization in the 90's. I never used the dreaded Templates (memory hoggers) but I've heard that they have improved since 2003.
So if you're like me that still codes in C++ as if it were C, then it's like "Why fix what ain't broken? There's always assembler"
i always believed that a large part of it was about "keeping their jobs".
i'm not talking only about VS2019 or C++. Windows grows because of it and you see the same buttons with the same functionality changing places in the same Form of say, System Properties.
then the UP one directory button disappears in Vista and 7, but then it's coming back in 8. they move the GUI to a heavily 3D multicolored look and then back to 8 colors and win3.11 looks.
it's progress alright, but i don't know if it's in the right direction.
the chances to start a C++ project that lasts for 5 years and at the end of the project to claim you know modern C++ are getting close to zero, much less to claim you know some other rapidly evolving language.
"if this frameworks are so great and helpful why do we need another one? why didn't the last 27 frameworks solve the problem? they didn't so you need the 28th framework, right?" - Jonathan Blow
Last Visit: 31-Dec-99 18:00 Last Update: 17-May-21 0:54