Comment by PaulDavisThe1st
1 day ago
Which wording was vitriolic and angry?
I wasn't seeking to establish my own authority in any way: "X is brilliant, we should listen to them" being countered by "there are lots of people with similar levels of experience with this thing who have many different opinions (I happen to be one of them)" isn't an appeal to authority. But sure, I could have left out the ("I happen to be one of them") part without changing my point much.
TFA is not about someone sharing their preferences. It's a direct call to not use many features, and claiming that to do otherwise is a mistake. Here's an example of sharing preferences:
"I've often tried to use C++'s variadic function templates, but I've found that just using initializer lists tends to be simpler and more readable".
Here's an example of how TFA would put that:
"do NOT use variadic function templates"
> It's a direct call to not use many features, and claiming that to do otherwise is a mistake.
I think you are thouroughly misunderstanding the blog post. It's not an aggressive "you must start using this now" thing, but mainly a definition of what "Orthodox C++" is so that communication about coding styles is simplified.
When somebodies says "this project is using the Orthodox C++ style" then it is immediately clear to everybody what exactly that entails (and if not they can google the term it and find the blog post). It's also a counter proposal to some of "Modern C++" madness (like "almost always auto") that was all the rage around a decade ago when that post was first written.
FWIW I wrote a fairly similar blog post in 2013 to describe what our team coding style looked like back then:
https://floooh.github.io/2013/06/21/sane-c.html
(PS: back then I still thought that C++ could be salvaged)
Fancy running into you here.
Anyway, as it turns out, while the STL container situation is better than it was, it's still really terrible performance-wise.
So even nowadays, you're better off writing your own containers for performance-critical tasks; the benefits can be in orders of magnitude (depending on the task at hand, of course).
> Which wording was vitriolic and angry?
“I haven't seen a less useful article about C++ in a long time, and as an HN reader, that's really saying something.”
The tone of all your comments reads as oddly intense imho. Perhaps not your intent. Opinions may vary.
> TFA is not about someone sharing their preferences. It's a direct call to not use many features, and claiming that to do otherwise is a mistake
Yeah that’s fine. The whole piece is an opinion piece on what someone thinks is a good approach to C++ development. There is no value in hedging every single bullet point with a bunch of flourish imho.
In game dev C++ circles nothing in this list is particularly controversial. It’s just writing down what many/most devs already did.