Egregoros

Signal feed

API Docs
Timeline

Post

Remote status

Context

17
π–π–Šπ–—π–‹π–†π–˜π–˜π–šπ–“π–Œπ–˜π–˜π–ˆπ–π–’π–šπ–™π–Ÿ :sonnenrad:

π–π–Šπ–—π–‹π–†π–˜π–˜π–šπ–“π–Œπ–˜π–˜π–ˆπ–π–’π–šπ–™π–Ÿ :sonnenrad:

@Verfassungsschmutz@nicecrew.digital remote
Open link
I haven't used C++ in a long time but I've never seen or heard of this style of declaration. Especially since "union" is a reserved word in C.

Normally, functions are declared by stating their return type, followed by the name and the parameter list, plus the function body (the latter two is what makes them functions). There is no special keyword required, and the double arrow notation isn't a thing either. I'm only aware of a single arrow (to access members of a pointer) and the shift operator (>>), but of course C++ does allow you to overload operators and I believe even declare your own.
BroDrillard

BroDrillard

@BroDrillard@nicecrew.digital remote
Open link
I for one have never liked C++.

Don't much care for OOP in general either. Esp not using "patterns" fucking everywhere.
"Object-oriented programming is an exceptionally bad idea which could only have originated in California." - Dijkstra

C is a fine language.
Classic Tyler

Classic Tyler

@tyler@nicecrew.digital remote
Open link
We had "objects" in C they are called structs and guess what libtard, we can have deep inheritance to via macros or simple inheritance by putting a pointer to another struct in your child object

The tricks aren't even that complicated either!!
π–π–Šπ–—π–‹π–†π–˜π–˜π–šπ–“π–Œπ–˜π–˜π–ˆπ–π–’π–šπ–™π–Ÿ :sonnenrad:

π–π–Šπ–—π–‹π–†π–˜π–˜π–šπ–“π–Œπ–˜π–˜π–ˆπ–π–’π–šπ–™π–Ÿ :sonnenrad:

@Verfassungsschmutz@nicecrew.digital remote
Open link

I mean, even the GNOME niggers, who literally built a whole modern DE in traditional C with manually bolted-on OOP, ended up creating an entirely new language from scratch (plus bindings for Rust, JavavScript, Python, and C#) in order to get more developers because not even trannydevs cared enough to learn all that shite, and they know how cope and dilate like nobody's business.

Classic Tyler

Classic Tyler

@tyler@nicecrew.digital remote
Open link
Which gnome version, 2? I have never really used it. This seems esoteric...................

And perhaps they just didn't do a good job with the architecture. Even QT can be a mess at points and it's the easiest I've ever had using c++ and that's saying something.
Replying to @WandererUber@poa.st

Replies

0

Fetching replies…