The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
You are correct - C++20 departed a lot from Stroustroup's vision, but it is still a good book for learning how he envisioned it would work, and some of the principles he outlines are important even to today's C++ programmers.
I would say that it is still a book well worth reading.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
Greetings I read Mr. Stroustrup's C++ text some years ago I have yet to figure out the language it was written in His presentation seems to me convoluted He speaks at length on topics without stating the topic until he is done speaking on the topic On other occasions as best I recall he delves into Quantum Mechanics when all I wish to learn at that point is how to add two and two I would rather eat glass than read it again The model of a language text is in my humble opinion that of Harbison and Steele for C - Cheerio
You post this in jest, but there are actual professional developers out there who post these kind of questions.
Well, you've been in the industry long enough to know there are a lot of developers out there who don't deserve the title.
Don't think doctors, surgeons, lawyers, politicians, book keepers and basically anyone else is any better.
There are bunglers in every profession and I'm afraid the pro/bungler ratio favors the bunglers.
It's a scary thought
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
And I think the site admin for Business Insider should also lose their job, this being another example of the media screwing things up. The case, including the headline, refers consistently to carbon dioxide. However the URL, and some of the meta tags in the HTML, refer to carbon monoxide. This is not a typo; this is whoever decides on the story URL and completes the tag data for the article either not paying attention to what's been reported, or deliberately "correcting" what they feel is a mistake.
or maybe to differentiate it from a story about another Oregon doctor who lost his license because of carbon dioxide falsehoods...