Initialization in C++ is Seriously Bonkers

Re:Initialization in C++ is Seriously Bonkers by williamdclt on Saturday January 05, 2019 @03:12PM (#18833935)

I learnt C as a first language, and those computer sytems concept were explained as we go. It's not that hard to understand what memory is and that variables values are stored there, and I've had no problem with pointers.

And the big advantage is that when you understand those concept and pointers, there's no magic in other languages (value/reference parameters, objects, functions as first-class citizens)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Initialization in C++ is Seriously Bonkers by maxxxxx on Saturday January 05, 2019 @03:22PM (#18833980)

Totally agree. Knowing C and a little assembly takes out the magic from other higher level languages. That's a good thing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Initialization in C++ is Seriously Bonkers by angry_octet on Saturday January 05, 2019 @07:08PM (#18835303)

Monads are still a little magical though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Initialization in C++ is Seriously Bonkers by Gibbon1 on Sunday January 06, 2019 @12:58AM (#18836832)

I keep thinking that C could support monads with a little work.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Initialization in C++ is Seriously Bonkers by geezerjay on Monday January 07, 2019 @05:12AM (#18844080)

As I see it, adding lambda/anonymous functions would have a transformative impact on the whole language. Adding them to C++ had a similar impact although the language offered some ways to get around the limitation.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Initialization in C++ is Seriously Bonkers by maxxxxx on Monday January 07, 2019 @01:04PM (#18847947)

Very true. When I look at C# pretty much all the cool stuff they have added relies on lambdas and closures. Same for JavaScript. It's the one feature that enables a ton of other features.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Initialization in C++ is Seriously Bonkers by MikeLui on Sunday January 06, 2019 @10:03AM (#18838632)

"Programmable semicolons."

[ Parent | on HN ]