News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on You can't make C++ not ugly, but you can't not try (2010). Parent comment

Re:You can't make C++ not ugly, but you can't not try (2010) by kccqzy on Thursday February 27, 2020 @01:25AM (#22431085)
That is indeed a very different time. I believe in the 90s the STL was considered too radical in its use of templates to be practical. People's perception has come a long way. Heck, instead of sane std::list<T> people used to do intrusive linked lists by having T inherit from a linked list base class. What a terrible idea.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:You can't make C++ not ugly, but you can't not try (2010) by AstralStorm on Thursday February 27, 2020 @04:07AM (#22431787)
Intrusive lists are so good they are likely to land one of these days in standard. Except via templates and traits not silly unnecessary inheritance. (Boost-like.)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:You can't make C++ not ugly, but you can't not try (2010) by gpderetta on Thursday February 27, 2020 @05:16AM (#22432074)
Yes, boost::intrusive is particularly great.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:You can't make C++ not ugly, but you can't not try (2010) by taejo on Thursday February 27, 2020 @07:28AM (#22432633)
Do people use std::list? I can't think of a time when I've needed a non-intrusive linked list (either vector is better or I need an intrusive list).
[ Parent | on HN ]