Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Random things that piss you off about C++

Name: Anonymous 2004-12-31 9:02

I hate how function declarations and function definitions usually don't look the same. For example

Declaration:
virtual void doShit()

Definition:
void MyNamespace::MyClass::doShit()

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-03 21:07

(And I find it hilarious that Sepples prohibits use of void * in place of another pointer type, but allows using int there. It's completely arbitrary and stupid.)

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-03 21:18

>>79
Nowadays any decent implementation has it as defined as 0, though.
You should read your shitty language's shitty standard.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-03 23:51

>>81
Really? I also find that hilarious!

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 2:03

>>80
| Over-reliance on a crutch provided by IDEs is absolutely no excuse for bad code.
I wouldn't call a feature that saves me from "look[ing] up the documentation or hunt[ing] around for the declaration in the header files" a "crutch".
|Also I just realized that I'm arguing with a Sepples programmer.
( ≖‿≖)

>>81
Not ints in general, just 0.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 9:19

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-25 6:47

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-21 13:17

　　　　　| ＼
　　　　　|Д｀)　　　No one is here.
　　　　　|⊂　　　　　I can dance now !
　　　　　|

　　　　　♪　　☆
　　　♪　　　／ ＼　　　 RANTA TAN
　　　　　　ヽ(´Д｀;)ﾉ 　　RANTA TAN
　　 　 　　　 (　 へ) 　　　RANTA RANTA
　 　 　 　 　　く 　　　　　　TAN

　　　♪　　　　☆
　　　　　♪　／ ＼　　　RANTA RANTA
　　　　　　ヽ（;´Д｀）ﾉ　　RANTA TAN
　　 　 　　　 (へ　 ) 　　　RANTA TANTA
　 　 　 　 　　　　 >　　　　TAN

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-16 19:59

necrosis distending the equilibrium

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-16 20:48

>>75
| what the hell was wrong with NULL? Too uppercase?

Ken Thompson prefers nil.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-16 21:07

|
Learn to quote.

Name: 90 2011-01-16 22:26


> >    >  > >  >   > .
>    >  > > >  >   > .
>    >  > > >  >   > .
>    >  > > >  >   > .
>    >  > > >  >   > .

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-16 22:28

> > > > > > > > > > > >

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-16 22:49

# PENIS
We need code that is actually easy on the eyes.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-16 23:23

The reason why a pointer to member function is larger than a pointer to a normal function.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-16 23:30

>>94
So, you're angry not that the pointer is bigger but because of the reason that it's bigger?

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 0:31

>>95
Both I guess, but more that the designers of C++ didn't fully think through what their hodgepodge of language features meant for the implementors.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 2:35

>>96
Actually, Bjarne did with respect to templates and instead of taking time with templates, threw them out there with an apology.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 8:10

Bjarne simply trolled us all with sepples.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 8:32

>>94
So you actually care about pointer size? What are you, a driver designer? A specialist for embedded programming? If not, why the fuck do you care about that?

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 8:36

100 GET?

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 8:44

>>99
PL implementers also care. Around here we should all be PL designers at least but that's nowhere near the case. I haven't even implemented any of my designs because they all suck so bad.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 9:11

>>101
Even *if* you try to implement a compiled PL, you still have no reason to care about pointer size, if you use a good backend (such as LLVM). If the backend forces you to care about pointersize, the backend is bullshit, and you should switch.

If you implement an interpreted PL, you most likely never have a reason to care about pointer size.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 9:29

>>102
LOL. Tell me another one.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 9:38

>>103
It's really hard to take you serious if your only comeback is ``LOL''.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 9:42

WHO FUCKING THREAD NECROMANCED THIS

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 9:45

>>105
>>88

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 11:11

>>105
THIS NECROMANCED THREAD FUCKING WHO

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-17 11:58

TURN UNDEAD

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 11:54

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-02 11:38

check my trips >>111

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-02 11:38

check my dubs >>110

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-02 12:00

Goodbye clojure.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-02 20:48

It's not cobol

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-03 0:09

[code
#include <iostream.h>
using namespace std;
int main(void) {
cout << "Hello World!"; cout << "\n"; return 0
}
[/code]

Name: Cudder !MhMRSATORI!fR8duoqGZdD/iE5 2013-03-03 10:05

It shouldn't be too hard to write a preprocessor that automatically pulls the method bodies out and prepends the correct declaration to them, so you can keep everything of the class together like with Java (one of the few good things about Java...) but still not create inline member functions.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-03 10:41


___oooo____ooooooo__ooooooo_ooooooo______ooo____oooooooo____oooo____ooooooo___________________ooo____ooo____oo_oooooo________________________     
_oo____oo__oo____oo_oo______oo____oo___oo___oo_____oo_____oo____oo__oo____oo________________oo___oo__oooo___oo_oo____oo______________________     
oo______oo_oo____oo_oooo____oo____oo__oo_____oo____oo____oo______oo_oo____oo_____oooooo____oo_____oo_oo_oo__oo_oo_____oo____oooooo_oooooo____     
oo______oo_oooooo___oo______ooooooo___ooooooooo____oo____oo______oo_ooooooo________________ooooooooo_oo__oo_oo_oo_____oo_____________________     
_oo____oo__oo_______oo______oo____oo__oo_____oo____oo_____oo____oo__oo____oo_____oooooo____oo_____oo_oo___oooo_oo____oo_____oooooo_oooooo____     
___oooo____oo_______ooooooo_oo_____oo_oo_____oo____oo_______oooo____oo_____oo______________oo_____oo_oo____ooo_oooooo________________________     
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________     
ooooooo_oo______oo____oooo___oo____oo_______oooo______oooooooo_oooo_oo_________oooo_oooooooo____ooooooo__oo______ooooooo_ooooooo_oooooo_____ooooo__
oo______oo______oo__oo____oo_oo___oo______oo____oo_______oo_____oo__oo__________oo_____oo_______oo____oo_oo______oo______oo______oo____oo__oo___oo_
oooo____oo______oo_oo________oo__oo______oo______________oo_____oo__oo__________oo_____oo_______oooooooo_oo______oooo____oooo____oo_____oo__oo_____
oo______oo______oo_oo________oooooo______oo______________oo_____oo__oo__________oo_____oo_______oo____oo_oo______oo______oo______oo_____oo____oo___
oo_______oo____oo___oo____oo_oo___oo______oo____oo_______oo_____oo__oo__________oo_____oo_______oo____oo_oo______oo______oo______oo____oo__oo___oo_
oo_________oooo_______oooo___oo____oo_______oooo_________oo____oooo_ooooooo____oooo____oo_______ooooooo__ooooooo_ooooooo_ooooooo_oooooo_____ooooo__
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Name: dildoflavouredcupcake 2013-03-03 20:33

Dark Side of the Moon is definitely my favorite Floyd album. I really like Yes too.

Favorite prog albums?

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-03 21:15

>>115
Why aren't you using LISP, CUDDER?

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-03 21:16

char *p = (char *) malloc(BUFZ);

Needing to cast the return type of a function returning void * is pointlessly pedantic, and worse it breaks compatibility with C. It's not like adding the cast makes things any safer - if I cared about safety I would template define everything and not use void pointers at all. Pretending to add safety where none exists is just idiotic.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-03 22:08

>>119
It actually decreases safety. If the function returns a non-pointer, the cast hides a major bug.
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -