Initialization in C++ is Seriously Bonkers

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 ]