Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with c++
Search options not deleted
user 217132
Questions about C++, a statically typed, free-form, multi-paradigm, compiled, general-purpose programming language.
13
votes
What's the reason for not using C++17's [[nodiscard]] almost everywhere in new code?
My opinion on [[nodiscard]] is that it should be used in places where lack of taking the result likely leads to an incorrect behavior of a program, and not just some redundant computation.
That's why, …
- 257
1
vote
2
answers
198
views
Maintaining locks across abstraction
Over and over I am faced with a similar problem: I have to perform two actions that are mostly unrelated, except that they need to share a mutex lock, at least for a moment. For example:
void action() …
- 257