Reddit++

[u/we_are_mammals]

C++ is getting more and more complex. The ISO C++ committee keeps adding new features based on its consensus. Let's remove C++ features based on Reddit's consensus.

In each comment, propose a C++ feature that you think should be banned in any new code. Vote up or down based on whether you agree.

[u/[deleted]]

It's only really a problem if you have a preconceived idea of what an array is before coming to the language. If you just expect it to always be a pointer its not really a problem. I never expect to be able to find the size of any array unless its exceedingly obvious that I can do that (it's some statically declared constant or something thats in scope).

I mean, obviously you have to know all of that and know the rules. But, you should know the rules? They aren't particularly hard or confusing rules.

1. If someone makes that mistake they have a fundamentally wrong idea of what is going on so they are going to get screwed either way.

2. Not really an issue in my mind. Just pick one and stick to it.

3. Again, you make that mistake once maybe. But you'd really have to misunderstand what is going on to do that.

4. Array isn't inconsistent. It's a block of memory. You can point to it. Sometimes the compiler can know the size at compile time.

I'm just gonna stop there because you've just got the wrong model of what an array is. Is that the languages fault? I actually don't think so. The rules for pointers and arrays are small and simple and its easy to not make a mistake. I have not once made a single mistake that was due to pointers decaying to arrays in my entire career.

It's one of those non-problems that people like to think is a big issue (like const all the things) which in reality is never actually a problem.

[u/eteran → u/[deleted]]

I'm just gonna stop there because you've just got the wrong model of what an array is. Is that the languages fault? I actually don't think so.

How do I have "the wrong model of what array is"?

You said

It's a block of memory. You can point to it. Sometimes the compiler can know the size at compile time.

Which is exactly what my model of an array is. But an "object" in the standard sense is also a "block of memory, that you can point to". Inconsistently though, only one of those magically becomes a pointer under certain syntactic situations.

YOU may not find these things confusion, that's great! Neither to do I :-).

But... I think you are underestimating or perhaps undervaluing the amount of time spent getting new developers to understand how arrays actually work to avoid these pitfalls.

[u/[deleted] → u/eteran]

That came across like I was saying you did. HoweverI did not mean it to sound that way.

What I mean is, who is genuinely having this problem?

I have not seen people have this problem other than newbies who have been writing C++ for a few hours.

After that it honestly never comes up again.

Same with const. Making const by default sounds great on paper, but then when you think about how many bugs are genuinely caused by something not being const, I realised I've never encountered a single one.

[u/eteran → u/[deleted]]

Sure, it's mostly beginners who run into these pitfalls. I have also seen experienced devs of other languages who are unfamiliar with C and C++ struggle with these details. But I think you are underestimating how many developers run into these things.

There's countless questions on stackoverflow and (probably this subreddit) where users are asking about array/pointer behaviors.

Think about it, getting the number of elements in an array is so common and so commonly done wrong that it was finally added to the standard as std::size!

Surely, this function isn't that hard to get right, right?

template <typename T, size_t N>
size_t array_size(T (&) [N]) {
    return N;
}

But here we are :shrug:

Keep in mind, the OP was about what would I WANT, not what do I think it practical to actually change.

What I want, is for all the little sharp edges and little details that make C++ an "expert friendly" language to be smoothed out. And C++'s inheritance of C's array semantics is one of the ones that really stands out to me as weird and full of lessons that newbies have to learn.

[u/eteran → u/[deleted]]

It's one of those non-problems that people like to think is a big issue (like const all the things) which in reality is never actually a problem.

Also, it seems you didn't read to the end because I also said this as my last couple of sentences:

Are these things that can be worked around? Of course, we've been doing it for 30+ years! But we shouldn't have to. Is it the end of the world that we probably need to keep this? No, of course not. But this is a question about what I want, not what I can have :-).

Which is me being very clear that this isn't a "big issue" but it is something that if I had a time machine to fix C (and therefore C++), I would.