Re: Modern C++

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Greg Keogh wrote: > Haven't used printf or scanf (or their friends) in ages. >> > > They were the first things to be highlighted when I compiled my old source > for the first time. > Not much of that around for windows code now > I also

Re: Modern C++

> > Haven't used printf or scanf (or their friends) in ages. > They were the first things to be highlighted when I compiled my old source for the first time. I also wanted Unicode support like we're used to with the managed String class, but I wasn't sure what the latest C++ convention was for

Re: Modern C++

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Greg Keogh wrote: > Not missing C++ because I'm still using it day-to-day :) >> > > How's the experience? Using all the new fangled styles, libraries and > compilers that appeared in the last 14 years? -- *GK* > Using boost in lieu of std,

Re: Modern C++

> > Not missing C++ because I'm still using it day-to-day :) > How's the experience? Using all the new fangled styles, libraries and compilers that appeared in the last 14 years? -- *GK*

Re: Modern C++

magic >> string macros, but worst of all is asynchrony via the pplx library. In >> managed code we can just await or let! bind for asynchrony, and the >> language syntax is short and clear. I still haven't managed to get a single >> async C++ function call to work yet. >> >> I was ho

Re: Modern C++

async C++ function call to work yet. > > I was hoping that after all these years, and with the trend to "modern > C++" that things would be better, and I'm sure they are once you get the > hang of it, but the change in style, libraries, language and compilers > makes your 20th

Modern C++

r asynchrony, and the language syntax is short and clear. I still haven't managed to get a single async C++ function call to work yet. I was hoping that after all these years, and with the trend to "modern C++" that things would be better, and I'm sure they are once you get the hang of it, but the chan