|
|
|
|
|
|
by torrent
1880 days ago
|
|
|
The typical, well known blog pattern for writing against C++: Show some buggy code an then conclude that C++ is wrong. Instead of asking: Who is wrong, the programmer trying to speak the language or the language itself? As always: Only use what you understand how it works. Instead of directly escalating it to cardinal questions of language superiority he had better used his time constructively and wrote a tutorial on how to correctly use things like string_view and span, that are a typed reference to memory that exceed the live time of the string_view. |
|
|
This is more complicated a question than you think. If the language is such that you always have to look up some particular feature, then it's likely the language is wrong in that the designer chose that syntax poorly. OTOH, if the programmer just "threw something together" that happened to be incorrect, then obviously the programmer.
This latter example is actually where having good error-messages can come in: pointing out what is wrong, and perhaps some relevant location in the language-definition. — Compare and contrast Ada and C++ error-messages (for "typical implementations") here as an example.