this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2024
332 points (98.8% liked)

Programmer Humor

19887 readers
411 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] xmunk 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

In two of your cases this operator is pretty shit because at some point you'll probably want to offset the access (this isn't a knock at you but at the feature).

This operator would only really be relevant to the last case which rarely comes up outside of infrastructure/library work (building a tool building tool) and usually those code bases are cautious to adopt new features too quickly anyways for portability.

I've done serious C++ work (not much in the past decade though) - while references are absolutely amazing and you essentially want to pass by const ref by default I think well written maintainable C++ should maybe have a dozen heap objects tops. C++ is a better language if you generally forget that pointers and bare arrays exist.

Just again - I think you're right and the fact that your list is only three things long (and arguably two of them would be misuses) is a pretty clear sign that this is an incredibly niche feature.

[โ€“] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I don't think this operator is a real feature, tbh ๐Ÿ˜…

[โ€“] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

The fact that he claims it's in C++ 29, while we are in 2024 is a good hint.

Or maybe he is a time traveler. Quick, go ask the next lottery numbers!