I don't think you ever stop learning C++... :)

But I trust cppreference more for the details, which are often necessary for C++ because, well, the devil's in the details. (And to be totally honest, the styling is just nicer.)

Compare the docs for std::vector for example, cplusplus[0] and cppreference[1]. The former spends three paragraphs explaining the internals, whereas the latter only spends one. The latter also includes information about what's been introduced on which language version (11, 17, 20) and assorted facts that the former doesn't discuss, e.g. the various container contracts that vector fulfills.

[0] http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/vector/vector/

[1] https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/container/vector

I also used cplusplus.com a lot when learning, and (as far as I can tell) it's basically fine, but cppreference.com has been my go-to for quite a while now. The latter is subjectively more complete/precise/helpful to me (and it's just as a good a reference for C, which is actually what I mostly use it for).

I'm curious what saagarjha's experience is, too.

cplusplus.com just has worse information; it annoys me because it outranks cppreference.com and I have never been the the former and said "gee, I'm glad I came here because it had better details".

Nothing, it's a fine reference. But I could see people wanting to skip it in the top results.