"C++14 Is Here: Summary of New Features"
    http://www.infoq.com/news/2014/08/cpp14-here-features

"C++14, the new C++ standard succeeding C++11, has been
finally approved and is heading to ISO for publication
this year. While improvements in C++14 are "deliberately
tiny" compared to C++11, says C++ creator Bjarne
Stroustrup, they still "add significant convenience for
users" and are a step on the route to make C++ "more
novice friendly.""

Looks like C++ is trending more verbose to me.

Lynn

On 8/27/2014 4:40 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-08-27, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> On 8/27/2014 2:44 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2014-08-27, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> ...
>>>> The first trend that increased the verbosity of C++
>>>> code for me was the addition of namespaces to the
>>>> standard libraries.  We gave up adding std:: all
>>>> over the place and just added a "using namespace std;"
>>>> to our global include.  We were porting to C++ from
>>>> Smalltalk in 2003 and the std:: just about broke the
>>>> port for us.
>>>
>>> Unless the compiler/standard library was broken WRT namespace std
>>> (like at least gcc was a few years before that) I find that hard to
>>> believe.
>>>
>>> /Jorgen
>>
>> We moved from Visual Studio 2003 to Visual Studio 2005
>> in the middle of the port to solve other problems in
>> the STL.  Visual Studio 2005 required the std:: on all
>> the standard library functions.  I hated and still hate
>> the "using namespace std;" but it sure did save our
>> bacon for a half million lines of C++ code.  One of
>> these days, I am going to get an intern to add that
>> std:: all over the place and get rid of the
>> "using namespace std;".
>
> Yeah, that was the use case for 'using namespace std'.  And yes, when
> it has saved you, you're still left with the problem to get rid of it
> (if it's worth it).
>
> /Jorgen

BTW, please do not get me wrong.  I like the concept
of namespaces very much even though they add to the
verbosity of the code.  Namespaces solve a very
serious problem that I have run into at least once.

But the using command is imprecise.  And dangerous
for a large program like ours.  So, it needs to go
out of our code.  Someday.  Probably when the sun
is halfway through its long cool down.

Thanks,
Lynn

On 8/28/2014 2:15 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 8/26/2014 4:36 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:09:04 -0500
>> Lynn McGuire  wrote:
>>
>>> "C++14 Is Here: Summary of New Features"
>>>      http://www.infoq.com/news/2014/08/cpp14-here-features
>>>
>>> "C++14, the new C++ standard succeeding C++11, has been
>>> finally approved and is heading to ISO for publication
>>> this year. While improvements in C++14 are "deliberately
>>> tiny" compared to C++11, says C++ creator Bjarne
>>> Stroustrup, they still "add significant convenience for
>>> users" and are a step on the route to make C++ "more
>>> novice friendly.""
>>>
>>> Looks like C++ is trending more verbose to me.
>>
>> Example?
>
> Namespaces, nullptr, a few other items.  I must admit
> that I do not understand the purpose of lambdas yet.

Except 'std' namespace (that has been around for more than a decade and 
a half now), nobody forces you to use 'nullptr' or lambdas.  The 
language as you know it has not really gone anywhere.  New things in it 
are for those who are able to use them.

> Nor the purpose of the auto keyword.  I moved to C++
> from Smalltalk for the strict typing (and 100X
> execution speed).

So, writing "nullptr" instead of "NULL" is more verbose, and the rest is 
what you don't understand (lambdas, 'auto')?  And you base your 
conclusions about the language *trends* on namespaces (that aren't 
actually new) and a keyword?  

V
-- 
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

On 8/28/2014 2:09 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 8/28/2014 2:45 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote:
>> Lynn McGuire  wrote:
>>> Looks like C++ is trending more verbose to me.
>>
>> I think you are delusional. Most of the features added since C++11 have
>> helped make the code *less* verbose. Range-based for, the 'auto' keyword,
>> lambdas, variadic templates...
>
> Ok, I do not understand the personal attack here.

<< delusional (comparative more delusional, superlative most delusional)
1. Suffering from or characterized by delusions >>

<< delusion
....
b :  a persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or persons 
or objects outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable 
evidence to the contrary; also :  the abnormal state marked by such 
beliefs >>

There is no personal attack.  Juha says that *he thinks* you're 
suffering from a delusion.  If anything, it's a statement of fact.  You 
may or may not be delusional.  However, it cannot be disputed that Juha 
is free to *think so* and express his thinking so.

> If you disagree with me, just state so.  However,
> a personal attack is a sign of a person who cannot
> make a logical statement.  I tend to ignore
> anything else past the personal attack on anyone.

You're free to do as you wish AFA ignoring anything goes.  If instead of 
arguing the technical side of things (i.e. countering his statements 
about range-based for, etc.) you turn to arguing aspects of perceived 
conduct of the other side ("personal attack"), it is *you* who cannot 
make a logical statement.

Ignore the "personal attack" rather than "anything else past" it.  Try 
it, and you will see the difference.

V
-- 
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

On 8/26/2014 4:36 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:09:04 -0500
> Lynn McGuire  wrote:
>
>> "C++14 Is Here: Summary of New Features"
>>      http://www.infoq.com/news/2014/08/cpp14-here-features
>>
>> "C++14, the new C++ standard succeeding C++11, has been
>> finally approved and is heading to ISO for publication
>> this year. While improvements in C++14 are "deliberately
>> tiny" compared to C++11, says C++ creator Bjarne
>> Stroustrup, they still "add significant convenience for
>> users" and are a step on the route to make C++ "more
>> novice friendly.""
>>
>> Looks like C++ is trending more verbose to me.
>
> Example?

Namespaces, nullptr, a few other items.  I must admit
that I do not understand the purpose of lambdas yet.

Nor the purpose of the auto keyword.  I moved to C++
from Smalltalk for the strict typing (and 100X
execution speed).

Thanks,
Lynn

On 8/28/2014 2:45 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> Lynn McGuire  wrote:
>> Looks like C++ is trending more verbose to me.
>
> I think you are delusional. Most of the features added since C++11 have
> helped make the code *less* verbose. Range-based for, the 'auto' keyword,
> lambdas, variadic templates...

Ok, I do not understand the personal attack here.

If you disagree with me, just state so.  However,
a personal attack is a sign of a person who cannot
make a logical statement.  I tend to ignore
anything else past the personal attack on anyone.

Lynn

Lynn McGuire  wrote:
> Looks like C++ is trending more verbose to me.

I think you are delusional. Most of the features added since C++11 have
helped make the code *less* verbose. Range-based for, the 'auto' keyword,
lambdas, variadic templates...

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

On Wed, 2014-08-27, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 8/27/2014 2:44 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>> On Wed, 2014-08-27, Lynn McGuire wrote:
....
>>> The first trend that increased the verbosity of C++
>>> code for me was the addition of namespaces to the
>>> standard libraries.  We gave up adding std:: all
>>> over the place and just added a "using namespace std;"
>>> to our global include.  We were porting to C++ from
>>> Smalltalk in 2003 and the std:: just about broke the
>>> port for us.
>>
>> Unless the compiler/standard library was broken WRT namespace std
>> (like at least gcc was a few years before that) I find that hard to
>> believe.
>>
>> /Jorgen
>
> We moved from Visual Studio 2003 to Visual Studio 2005
> in the middle of the port to solve other problems in
> the STL.  Visual Studio 2005 required the std:: on all
> the standard library functions.  I hated and still hate
> the "using namespace std;" but it sure did save our
> bacon for a half million lines of C++ code.  One of
> these days, I am going to get an intern to add that
> std:: all over the place and get rid of the
> "using namespace std;".

Yeah, that was the use case for 'using namespace std'.  And yes, when
it has saved you, you're still left with the problem to get rid of it
(if it's worth it).

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn    O  o   .

On 8/27/2014 2:44 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-08-27, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> On 8/27/2014 6:28 AM, Chris Vine wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:09:04 -0500
>>> Lynn McGuire  wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>> Looks like C++ is trending more verbose to me.
>>>>
>>>> Lynn
>>>
>>> Well, I guess we can all enjoy a good troll.
>>>
>>> Language "trending" is a slightly odd way of putting it, but taking the
>>> word at its face value and having used C++11 quite a bit now, I would
>>> say that C++11 definitely encourages the writing of simpler code than
>>> C++98, and so is "trending" less verbose than C++98.  I would be very
>>> surprised if C++14 wasn't moving in the same direction.
>>>
>>> Chris
>>
>> The first trend that increased the verbosity of C++
>> code for me was the addition of namespaces to the
>> standard libraries.  We gave up adding std:: all
>> over the place and just added a "using namespace std;"
>> to our global include.  We were porting to C++ from
>> Smalltalk in 2003 and the std:: just about broke the
>> port for us.
>
> Unless the compiler/standard library was broken WRT namespace std
> (like at least gcc was a few years before that) I find that hard to
> believe.
>
> /Jorgen

We moved from Visual Studio 2003 to Visual Studio 2005
in the middle of the port to solve other problems in
the STL.  Visual Studio 2005 required the std:: on all
the standard library functions.  I hated and still hate
the "using namespace std;" but it sure did save our
bacon for a half million lines of C++ code.  One of
these days, I am going to get an intern to add that
std:: all over the place and get rid of the
"using namespace std;".

Lynn

On Wed, 2014-08-27, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 8/27/2014 6:28 AM, Chris Vine wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:09:04 -0500
>> Lynn McGuire  wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> Looks like C++ is trending more verbose to me.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>
>> Well, I guess we can all enjoy a good troll.
>>
>> Language "trending" is a slightly odd way of putting it, but taking the
>> word at its face value and having used C++11 quite a bit now, I would
>> say that C++11 definitely encourages the writing of simpler code than
>> C++98, and so is "trending" less verbose than C++98.  I would be very
>> surprised if C++14 wasn't moving in the same direction.
>>
>> Chris
>
> The first trend that increased the verbosity of C++
> code for me was the addition of namespaces to the
> standard libraries.  We gave up adding std:: all
> over the place and just added a "using namespace std;"
> to our global include.  We were porting to C++ from
> Smalltalk in 2003 and the std:: just about broke the
> port for us.

Unless the compiler/standard library was broken WRT namespace std
(like at least gcc was a few years before that) I find that hard to
believe.

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn    O  o   .