OO is not Computing, Newer is not More modern

Re:OO is not Computing, Newer is not More modern by udp on Monday April 30, 2012 @08:36AM (#3908941)

I also take or leave C++ language features as required, and I wish more people shared your point of view.

Among the C++ crowd (particularly over at Stack Overflow) there's this infuriating attitude that any code that doesn't use std::string, std::vector or boost::magic_super_auto_ptr is language sacrilege and the developer should be burned with fire because it's not C++ it's C and malloc is deprecated and arrays are deprecated, and, and...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:OO is not Computing, Newer is not More modern by UK-AL on Monday April 30, 2012 @08:42AM (#3908960)

That's because without using these things, people can end up accidently shooting themselves foot quite easily. Like accidentally removing the end character from a char* string...

Normal malloc, and dealloc can get stupidly complicated when lots of other objects reference one memory location, which is why these referencing auto pointers come in, with built bounds checking etc

Using those things is defensive programming.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:OO is not Computing, Newer is not More modern by v0cab on Monday April 30, 2012 @09:27AM (#3909122)

Did you mean to respond to my post?

I agree with what you said. I tried hard to use C++ language features (especially STL) in a previous job and it was more hassle than it was worth, honestly.

[ Parent | on HN ]