← Back to context

Comment by Joker_vD

8 hours ago

For one reason, it is because C++ runtime (and its standard library) is a whole own can of worms which most people would rather not touch if they can afford to. Which they mostly can.

> Sure, C++ has its own downsides

"Sure, getting your eyes gouged out has its downsides, but is it better to read that awful mess of macros in C instead?" The answer most people would give to this question may surprise you.

20 comments

Joker_vD

Reply
kccqzy  7 hours ago

Here we go again. Yes there are bad parts in the C++ standard library and there are good parts. But if you are just trying to do type safe generic data structures you are unlikely to touch the bad parts. Many codebases forbids parts of the standard library, e.g. LLVM forbids including <iostream>. You can forbid using parts of the standard library too.

  • Joker_vD  7 hours ago

    > Yes there are bad parts in the C++ standard library and there are good parts.

    Okay, other than <vector>, what are the good parts? Because as the sibling comments rightfully point out, migrating your codebase from C to C++ just to be able to use <vector> is not worth it.

    The <map> is a sad joke played upon the C++ programmers by the standard committee.

    • pjmlp  7 hours ago

      Strings, something that C still doesn't do properly, not even having something like SDS into the standard library.

      <map> does the work just fine, not everyone has winning microbenchmarks as part of their daily work.

      11 replies →

    • kccqzy  6 hours ago

      So what? You like <vector>, and make it the only allowed include. Write all other type safe generic data structures by hand using C++ syntax. Problem solved. In fact many old codebases migrated from C already has their own implementations of strings and vectors and hash tables, so these projects can totally forbid the C++ standard library versions in favor of their own versions, and only pull in <type_traits> for easier type safe generic data structure programming.