So you never tried the -auto-fix option?
Shame on you! ;-)

C++ is harder than other languages.

E.g. "a constructor for a class is auto generated by the compiler when needed"

Under what circumstances does this rule apply?

Oh, and what are the pitfalls?

E.g.

class B {
int i;
float f;
}

class D : public B {
int s;
public:
      D() {
          s = 5;
      }
}

B b;
D d;

What value has b.i?
What value has d.i?

Hint: consider B and D to be in different compilation units.

My bet: your answer is wrong.

Wow: that above was a super simple example about problems in C++ that make C++ a very hard language

Actually it goes like this:

C: You shoot yourself into the foot.
C++: You shoot yourself into the foot, and have blown of your whole leg.

Yes, it should.
But actually C++ is a beast of a language which no one so far quickly mastered.
All we have now in C++, like STL, boost etc. is stuff that was envisioned by people who minimum had 10 years language experience before they even came to the idea to (ab)use language features like that.
When I read the first time about the concepts of the STL (that was round 1993, and it was not even called STL then) I was shocked about its simplicity and that I was so dumb that I never came to that idea myself. Basically the only "genious" I had at that time was that I had invented "traits" myself ... because I needed them. (Had about 5 years C++ experience then)

In the field I work in, we aren't allowed to use RAII; we compile with it turned off.
You are mistaken.
You can not turn of RAII. It is only a constructor call and a destructor call.

Properties are easy achieved in C++ by using so called "property templates" where you wrap attributes into such a template and overwrite operator = for assignment and the cast operator for reading ...

Perhaps you should catch up and buy one of the 20 year old C++ books :D

Nothing beats C++ in multiple inheritance (which Java does not have and Groovy/Scala only mimic half arsed) and in templates, which Java/Groovy does not have either. Not sure about Scala, originally they wanted real templates, but no idea if they scaled down to generics, too.

For non-ducks, the most important things to know about C++ aren't list in the summery: RAII and shared_ptr<T>

That is not really correct. As soon as you know about ctors and dtors you know about RAII, no special "point in the list" needed.

Because it is not a scale but a method of teaching music/notes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

And as to 4 above, that stands on its own. Again, OCO2 shows how much China emits, which is far far more than is generally admitted since Chinese leaders are lying.

How stupid are you?
Who cares what China is saying?
We know how much CO2 they produce by simply counting their oil, coal production, cars and power plants.
Man, what a no brainer.

No idea why you try to use propaganda links like the first one, which is an _american_ ... obviously they cheat with their "officially" released data, like you claim China would.

China's emissions from 1850 on, exceed America's total.
Very unlikely and no one can figure which is the case as we have no data bout that, neither from China nor from the USA, so it is completely brain dead to argue about that.

Your idea who produced how much CO2 in what times are all wrong.

Especially the retarded idea that in 10 years time frame China had produced more accumulated CO2 than the USA in 150 years.

A no brainer actually when you know that China just exceeded the US production a few years ago :D

Ice on land is melting during summer.
That means fresh water is on top of the sea water ... during summer.
When it gets cold in winter that freshwater is freezing and giving the false impression there would be some mystery going on.
The sea ice we are talking about 50 years ago, was *permanent* ice.
No we have sporadic ice ... and the so called records are exaggerated, there is no record.

The maximum was no maximum.

And most important it was not MASS but just area. And 6 month later all that "maximum" area ice melted in the summer again.

What is so hard to grasp that the problem is not melting or freezing of sea water?

The melting of ice on land is the problem, because it flows into the sea and rises its level.

That is actually a no brainer every child should grasp.

Why are you writing this nonsense about W's and O's when all the points you make are clearly wrong?

What in your opinion is OCO2 btw ... ? Do you really mean the orbiter? Then your sentences make no real sense to me.

The links don't tell me anything new.

Except that the UK one starts with the claim, that UK would be the best place for wind power in the world.

Which is clearly wrong. The best place is antarctica, but no one there needs so much power.

A wikipedia article claiming a certain place is the best for wind power is just: bollocks.

Especially if the most important part: "WHY is that so?" is missing ;D

Regarding a clue, you where the one claiming Denmark would be north of UK ... while it is east last time I checked :D

More or less all of Scotland is north of Denmark.

Again, for the areas directly west of Denmark, that is mainly England and Wales and the southern part of Scotland: there is no plausible reason why those parts should have more wind than Denmark.

And I guess if you had more google foo, and I more patience, we simply could find a map in the internet showing the relevant wind speed factor for the UK and Denmark ...