[pjmlp]

I know C++ since 1993, I am quite curious how pointer semantics have anything to do with RAII.

[junon]

Because smart pointers are still pointers under the hood. You're forgetting the time before you know what pointers were - people coming from higher level languages don't immediately grok the concept. By teaching them automatic memory management patterns like we use in C++ without teaching them why you need such things, they'll never fully understand the code they're writing.

It's like the "I know React but not JavaScript" crowd all over again.

[pjmlp]

If you think RAII is about smart pointers, you really don't understand it.

RAII is about resource management, regardless of where those resources live on.

Heap allocated, OS handles, indexes on a fixed sized buffer, network sockets, ...

[junon]

Yes, I'm aware, thanks. Lifetimes, ownership, etc. are all overlaps of RAII and associated concepts.

Again, what did being pedantic prove here? You clearly understood what I meant.

[ncmncm]

Yeah, doesn't make sense. Pointers are less useful in C++, because we have better things now.

[junon]

Of course we do. You still need to know how pointers work to use RAII effectively, though.

[pjmlp]

Not at all, because RAII is about constructors/destructors, and not at all about pointers.

Heap allocated data is one special case of OS resources that can be managed by constructor/destructor pairs.

[junon]

What did being pedantic prove here?

[ncmncm]

The thread started with you insisting a C-level conception of pointers is essential to coding C++, which turns out to be false.

Learning C first is a very bad way to learn C++. One can pick up pointers later, and asm blocks after that.