Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #118722

Re: std::map advocacy

From Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c++
Subject Re: std::map advocacy
Date 2024-04-09 13:12 +0300
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <20240409131204.00004f35@yahoo.com> (permalink)
References (11 earlier) <uv0dd7$3diif$1@dont-email.me> <20240408133457.000005a9@yahoo.com> <rGVQN.157772$_a1e.63952@fx16.iad> <20240409004750.0000131f@yahoo.com> <uv2pmk$32g9$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 09:11:16 +0200
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

> On 08/04/2024 23:47, Michael S wrote:
> 
> (I am speaking for myself, and my own projects - and my uses of C++ 
> might differ a lot from those of Scott.)
> 
> > 
> > What proof do you have that C++ was an advantage for your projects
> > rather than handicap?
> > Unlike standard library, the things you mention don't sound like
> > something that directly improves productivity.
> > In particular, is there really a productivity gain from sort of data
> > hiding available in C++ vs disciplined C with systematic
> > documentation and project-wide naming conventions? I am pretty sure
> > that even if gain exists it is below noise.  
> 
> Seriously?  Are you suggesting that documentation of requirements, 
> restrictions and features is just as good as expressing them in code?

Naming conventions are expressed in code.
E.g. if you systematically prefix all you private data members then I
would think that it's not just as good for productivity as C++ access
control, but better than it.

>  I assume that your own coding and documentation is flawless, but
> have you never seen code written by anyone else where the source code
> and the comments or documentation are out of sync or directly
> contradictory?
>

There is no language solution to problem of undisciplined co-worker.

> The more you can express your requirements and the features of the 
> program in code itself, the better.  It gives vastly better checking 
> than asking someone to read through the documentation.  It keeps 
> everything in sync.  It gives the compiler more knowledge - for
> better checking, and for more efficient code generation (which often
> matters a lot in embedded systems).
>

I can't see of any C++ feature except templates that can lead to more
efficient code generation vs C. And I probably wouldn't want templates
written by ourselves (as opposed to std and saner parts of boost) in my
embedded project for reasons mostly unrelated to efficiency.

> Tell me, is it better to document that users must call
> "flubar_init()" on their "flubar" objects before calling
> "flubar_bar()" on them, or is it better to make a "flubar" class with
> a constructor to do the "init" automatically and guaranteed by the
> language?

It depends.
For trivial initialization constructor is a little better. For
non-trivial initialization init function is better, sometimes
significantly.
Overall, gain from sane use of constructors is smaller than harm caused
even by relatively minor misuse of constructors.

> Is it more productive to have developers check each
> other's code for accidental mixups between two enum types, or to have
> the compiler throw a hard compile-time error?
>

It's not like C++ enum classes are convenient. It's not like people
that use them tend to cast left, right and center.
And its not like even in ideal scenario they can improve productivity.

> > 
> > One "free" C++ feature that on paper could improve productivity in
> > the sort of project that you mention is constant expressions. I have
> > no experience with it, so can't say whether the gain is real or its
> > just my wrong impression. > This feature is relatively new, at
> > least in form that no longer looks like a toy, so I would guess
> > that you didn't use it in at least 2 out of 3 project that you
> > mention as success stories. 
> 
> It's only been around for a decade or so, and thus is relatively
> young. And it certainly has improved since its introduction in C++11.
>  Yes, it can be extremely useful.
>

In theory, or you have positive first hand experience? 
I mean, something that warrants an epithet "extremely"?

> But it's only one of the dozen or more features of C++ that I use to
> be more productive and write safer and more efficient code for small 
> embedded systems.
> 

Try one day to start your next project in C. You will likely find out
that productivity is the same if not improved.

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-04 20:11 +0200
  Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-04 21:55 +0300
    Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-04-04 20:00 -0400
      Re: Ain't that beautiful ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-05 00:21 +0000
        Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-05 17:44 +0300
          Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-05 17:27 +0200
            Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-05 18:37 +0300
              Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-05 18:04 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-06 15:55 -0700
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 08:28 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-07 15:51 +0000
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 19:35 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 12:21 -0700
    Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-05 05:05 +0200
      Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-05 17:52 +0300
        Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-05 17:26 +0200
          Re: Ain't that beautiful ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-05 20:00 +0000
            Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-05 22:29 +0200
              Re: Ain't that beautiful ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-05 21:29 +0000
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-06 09:06 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-04-06 17:29 +0300
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-06 14:56 +0000
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-06 18:34 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 03:00 +0800
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 08:28 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-04-08 07:47 +0800
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-07 15:25 +0300
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-07 16:00 +0300
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-07 16:06 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-07 18:37 +0300
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-07 15:58 +0000
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-07 18:00 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 19:38 +0200
                std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-07 18:38 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-07 18:06 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-07 19:35 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-08 11:29 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-08 13:34 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-04-08 19:18 +0800
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-08 16:32 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-04-09 08:40 +0800
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-09 12:48 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-09 13:16 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-08 15:30 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-08 17:19 +0000
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-09 00:47 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-08 23:00 +0000
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-09 02:20 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-09 15:22 +0000
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-09 09:11 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-09 13:12 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-09 15:01 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-04-08 07:10 -0400
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-08 15:45 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-04-08 19:42 -0400
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-09 09:45 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-09 13:27 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-09 15:13 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-09 18:12 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-09 18:22 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-04-10 02:24 -0400
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-11 00:07 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-11 16:18 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-11 16:39 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-11 16:21 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-11 15:31 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-04-11 22:40 +0800
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-11 16:55 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-11 16:13 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-04-11 18:18 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-11 09:57 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-04-11 13:47 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-11 14:04 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-04-11 19:25 +0800
                Re: std::map advocacy scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-07 16:09 +0000
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-07 19:48 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 19:45 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-04-08 16:37 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 19:44 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-08 11:15 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-08 14:09 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-08 16:26 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-08 16:54 +0200
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-08 20:52 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-09 00:17 +0300
                Re: std::map advocacy Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-09 07:34 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 16:39 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-04-07 18:41 +0300
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 19:36 +0200
                Re: Ain't that beautiful ? Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-04-07 18:25 +0300

csiph-web