News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Will Carbon Replace C++? by afc on Tuesday February 28, 2023 @12:08AM (#34965856)
Citation needed? My team generally avoids auto and tends to spell out the types most of the time, which we find makes everything more readable. Code is written once but read many times...
Re:Will Carbon Replace C++? by hot_gril on Tuesday February 28, 2023 @12:23AM (#34965943)
imo types don't make things more readable. You know the "fluent programming" thing where you do obj.doThis().doThat().doThis().doAnotherThing() and probably 20 more lines of this? That's entirely because people didn't want to bother writing out LHS types, but whatever version of the language only let you avoid that if you chained things (there was no auto or var). Maybe it's more of a Java practice, though.
Re:Will Carbon Replace C++? by LaLaLand122 on Tuesday February 28, 2023 @12:51AM (#34966119)
A citation of what's "Modern C++"? The term is a made up concept with no proper definition...

But "Herb Sutter says you should use it, he even gave it a catchy name/acronym" is as good as it gets. And he does so AFAIK in the same place he created the "Almost Always Auto" name: https://herbsutter.com/2013/08/12/gotw-94-solution-aaa-style...

Notice that he says "the main reasons to declare variables using auto are for correctness, performance, maintainability, and robustness—and, yes, convenience, but that’s in last place on the list.". He is arguing literally the opposite of what you do, that using auto avoids bugs ("for correctness").

I'm not going to argue in favour or against "Almost Always Auto". But I see no problem calling it "Modern C++".

* Herb Sutter being the convener of ISO WG21