Comment Re:No National Center for Men & Tech...? (Score 1) 473
Of course I mind - your judgement should also be based on grammar.
Of course I mind - your judgement should also be based on grammar.
Yes. And it turns out that it *is* possible to write readable Perl. It's just that if you do so, all the Perlista look at you as if you were something they'd trodden in.
C++ is often unreadable
That's not a problem with the language, it's a problem with whoever wrote the code.
I've been writing software for about 40 years - and one of the things I've observed in that time is that it's possible to write unreadable code in pretty much any language. I've also observed that it's possible to write readable code in pretty much any language.
The main reasons I have for this are the needs to manage memory usage and disk access at a very granular level
And why, exactly, do you imagine you need these things?
(You may well do - but you don't give a reason for it, so it's entirely possible that you don't need to manage those things on a granular level)
Which is *exactly* the point I'm making... You very rarely (if ever) need to write 'new'.
17 years? Talk about a newbie - I've been a member of WG21 for longer than that.
I have explained; I'm not wrong.
And I certainly wasn't suggesting you need to "look into the implementation of make_unique in your compiler's version of the STL".
But hey, apart from the small detail of everything you wrote, you're completely right.
G2P says:
You should almost never see a new
You claim:
That is complete nonsense.
At some point you have to allocate the objects/memory. And for that you need a "new".
To demonstrate that you're wrong, I mention make_shared as an example of allocating objects without your having to see new.
Was that really so hard to figure out?
Mod parent "+1 - it's not cynicism when it's true"
YOMANK!
Would you go to slashdot.org/macdonalds and expect a page about hamburgers to come up?
No. I'd expect a link to an article on dice.com.
see, for example, std::make_shared. http://en.cppreference.com/w/c...
I hadn't seen it. I thank you.
Strider's entirely correct here...although I don't think this actually counts as "Insightful", more a "statement of the bleedin' obvious"
If the students actually care about what they're learning
They don't.
unless they are blithering idiots
They are.
they'll use their critical thinking
They have none
go learn what extra they may need all by themselves.
They won't.
The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine
