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
Sections title:apples
body:"apples oranges"
URL url:"*.example.com"
Favorites infavorites:mine
infavorites:1234
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 Search options user 8553

C++11 is the name of the C++ standard, approved in 2011. It replaces the previous C++03 standard, adding various core language changes and fixes, and an improved and expanded standard library.

5
votes
No. The Google style guide makes no sense for anybody except Google. And even for them it's highly questionable. The best approach to take is to forget the Google Style Guide and everything you've rea …
answered Mar 5 '15 by DeadMG
6
votes
This is fundamentally impossible. Consider std::unique_ptr<Thing>. If it was possible to emulate rvalue references as a library, it would not be a language feature.
answered Apr 3 '12 by DeadMG
38
votes
The motivations in C++ are more extreme, as types can become vastly more convoluted and complex than C# types due to metaprogramming and other things. auto is faster to write and read and more flexibl …
answered May 11 '12 by DeadMG
3
votes
No, this is undefined behaviour. The temporary variable will not have it's lifetime extended. In addition, I'd say it's a code smell to not offer Derived1 and Derived2. Only accessing through the bas …
answered Dec 3 '11 by DeadMG
2
votes
LINQ-to-objects is already supported in the Standard library and has been since it's inception. The syntax is just a bit different- it was never intended to emulate SQL and has way too many iterators …
answered Aug 16 '11 by DeadMG
1
vote
The most simple answer to this question is that you should never have used that term. It is a term that should not exist. It has no meaning. Every program is either C, or C++. And that was quiet t …
answered Sep 30 '15 by DeadMG
85
votes
It's simple. C++11 makes code dramatically easier, cleaner to write, and faster. nullptr is a VAST improvement over the old 0. It's type-safe and doesn't convert when it shouldn't- unlike 0. It's a …
answered Nov 9 '11 by DeadMG
4
votes
You would effectively be talking about defining an entire new language- which is what's already happening with the numerous proposed C++ replacements over the years. I think that it's telling that non …
answered Apr 3 '12 by DeadMG
0
votes
No, you can't implement it without a performance penalty. PIMPL is, by it's very nature, a performance penalty, as you are applying a run-time indirection. Of course, this depends on exactly what you …
answered Aug 7 '15 by DeadMG
9
votes
Weak compilers, large scope, existing library weaknesses, and potentially negative library interactions. First, it was very hard for implementations to support all of C++98, and only occurred many ye …
answered Dec 23 '14 by DeadMG
6
votes
Simple: Speed, and portability. If C++ guaranteed that you got an exception when you de-reference an invalid pointer, then it wouldn't be portable to embedded hardware. If C++ guaranteed some other th …
answered Aug 9 '11 by DeadMG