C++ Discussion Thread

I hope you're only pretending to be retarded as that's pretty embarrassing otherwise.

It's the weakest example you could have used and you act like it proves that GCC is made by lazy people who are leaving out half the standard. I even agree with you that it's better to have standards for your standards. But your point about compiler writers being lazy is just weird. The big 4 are massive pieces of work and C++ compilers are notoriously hard to write.

...

are you the retard from /agdg/ that "worked with c++ for YEARS" and has no idea how the language works?

Attached: 6654645666555.png (261x381, 123.18K)

WW3 can't come soon enough.

Attached: o_o.webm (1920x1080, 511.71K)

But the C++ STD lacks features, user. There still isn't a DateTime class, still no standard networking...

C and C++ developers who want to stay sane should stick with C89 and C++98. After that the languages (mostly C++) became victims of design by committee. It is more trouble than it is worth to maintain projects without a stable base.

--Bjarne Stroustrup

Attached: oceans-chase-sinking-videoSixteenByNine1050.jpg (1050x591, 101.1K)

Not literally everything has to go in the std

Yes, it's a simple refcount based garbage collector.

Nope, and if you can't see smart pointers as being a form of garbage collection maybe you should learn how the language works.

Wrong. A garbage collector implemented with ref counted smart pointers is not the same thing as a smart pointer.