intermediate

Stricter Expression Evaluation Order in C++17--Bartlomiej Filipek

Do you know the rules?

Stricter Expression Evaluation Order in C++17

by Bartlomiej Filipek

From the article:

C++ has many dark corners and many caveats that can cause you to scratch your head in confusion. One of the issues we had until C++17 was the evaluation order of expressions. In this blog post, I’ll show you the new rules that we got in C++17 that made this complicated term much simpler and practical.

Here are the main points for today:

  • What’s the case with make_unique vs unique_ptr<T>(new T) in a function call.
  • What are the new rules for C++17?
  • Are all bugs fixed and now well defined?

Let’s go.

Template Specialization--Rainer Grimm

The series continue.

Template Specialization

by Rainer Grimm

From the article:

Templates define the behavior of families of classes or functions. Often it is required that special types or non-types may be treated special. To support this use case, you can specialize templates.

Template Argument Deduction of Class Templates--Rainer Grimm

The series continue.

Template Argument Deduction of Class Templates

by Rainer Grimm

From the article:

In my last post Template Arguments, I wrote about function template type deduction (C++98) and auto type deduction (C++11). Today I wear more modern hats. I start with automatic type deduction of non-type template parameters and class templates (C++17) and finish with automatic type deduction of concepts (C++20).

Reversing words of a string with ranges--Marco Arena

A new interpretation of a classical problem:

Reversing words of a string with ranges

by Marco Arena

From the article:

In this post I share the story of a “C++ aha-moment”, hence I use the hashtag #thatsarotate (resumed last Saturday at the Italian C++ Conference 2021 to honor our keynote speaker Sean Parent). Why not sharing your own stories of “C++ aha-moments” adding the same hashtag to your tweets, posts, or whatever? It would be really appreciated...

Quick Q: Overload resolution between object, rvalue reference, const reference

Quick A: the better match is picked, and an error generated if there none.

Recently on SO:

Overload resolution between object, rvalue reference, const reference

As there is only one parameter, the rule is that one of the three viable parameter initializations of that parameter must be a better match than both the other two. When two initializations are compared, either one is better than the other, or neither is better (they are indistinguishable).

Without special rules about direct reference binding, all three initializations mentioned would be indistinguishable (in all three comparisons)...