intermediate

Quick Q: What's the difference between vector<T...> and vector<T>...? -- StackOverflow

SO's version of the question added one layer of wrapping:

What's the difference between doing vector<vector<T...>> and vector<vector<T>...>

I saw code like this earlier:

 

using A = std::vector<std::vector<T>...>

where T is a variadic list of template arguments. I wanted to know what the difference is between putting the parameter pack at the end of the last angle bracket and the first. For example:

using B = std::vector<std::vector<T...>>;

Both of these two compile fine but I don't know what the difference is.

Can someone explain? Thanks.

Introduction To the C++11 Feature: Extended friend Declaration -- FangLu

Head on over to the C/C++ Cafe for:

Introduction to the C++11 feature: extended friend declaration

by FangLu

Excerpt:

The extended friend declaration feature is newly introduced in the C++11 standard. In this article, I will introduce this feature and provide some examples on how to use this feature.

 

Firstly, let's see why this feature is added into C++11. ...

 

GotW #1: Variable Initialization—or Is It? -- Herb Sutter

Herb Sutter is resuming his Guru of the Week series of problem-and-solution articles about coding in C++, with the intent to gradually update the 88 existing issues and write a few more along the way.

The first problem was posted today:

GotW #1: Variable Initialization -- or Is It? (3/10)

by Herb Sutter

This first problem highlights the importance of understanding what you write. Here we have a few simple lines of code — most of which mean something different from all the others, even though the syntax varies only slightly.

The solution is coming "soon"...

Quick Q: Why does shared_ptr of void work? -- StackOverflow

Quick A: When it comes to destruction, only your deleter knows for sure... but he's captured at construction time, so all starts well and stays well.

Why do std::shared_ptr<void> work

I found some code using std::shared_ptr to perform arbitrary cleanup at shutdown. At first I thought this code could not possibly work, but then I tried the following:

[edited]

int main() {
  vector<shared_ptr<void>> v;
  {
    v.push_back( shared_ptr<test>( new test() ) );
  }
} // [[ how can this destroy type-safely? ]]

Quick Q: static constexpr variable vs. constexpr function? -- StackOverflow

With a nice Quick A by Morwenn that not only gives the right answer as of today, but is current with a feature voted into C++14 just two weeks ago that lets you drop the ()'s:

static constexpr variable vs. function

Is there a difference between declaring floating point constant as a static constexpr variable and a function as in example below, or is it just a matter of style?

class MY_PI
{
public:
    static constexpr float MY_PI_VAR = 3.14f;
    static constexpr float MY_PI_FUN() { return 3.14f; }
}

An Idiot's Guide to C++ Templates -- Ajay Vijayvargiya

A lot of people appreciated the information in this pair of articles, which cover the noted topics:

An Idiot's Guide to C++ Templates -- Part 1

The Syntax Drama

Function Templates

  • Pointers, References and Arrays with Templates
  • Multiple Types with Function Templates
  • Function Template -- Template Function
  • Explicit Template Argument Specification
  • Default Arguments with Function Templates

Class Templates

  • Multiple Types with Class Templates
  • Non-type Template Arguments
  • Template Class as Argument to Class Template
  • Default Template Arguments with Class Templates
  • Class' Methods as Function Templates

An Idiot's Guide to C++ Templates -- Part 2

Requirements from the Underlying Type

  • Requirements: Function Templates
  • Requirements: Class Templates

Separation of Declaration and Implementation

  • Separating Class Implementation

Templates and Other Aspects of C++

  • Class Templates, Friends
  • Class Templates, Operator Overloading
  • Class Templates, Inheritance
  • Function Pointers and Callbacks
  • Templates and Virtual Functions
  • Templates and Macros
  • Function Overloading

STL - An Introduction

Templates and Library Development

Explicit Instantiation

C++ on the Web: Run Your Big 3D Game in the Browser! -- Andre Weissflog

cpp-web.PNGBuilding C++ to target Javascript (e.g., asm.js) and execute C++ in the browser is becoming quite the popular indoor sport. Here's a current presentation and experience report:

C++ on the Web: Run your big 3D Game in the browser! (slides)

by Andre Weissflog
Head of Development, Berlin
Bigpoint GmbH

My presentation about porting large C/C++ code bases to the browser (emscripten, flascc, Google Native Client)

From the Wrap-up slide:

  • You can run big C/C++ code bases ("a million lines of code") in the browser.
  • Javascript is already fast enough for many types of games.
  • Massive performance improvements happening right now (better code generation, JS engines better at running generated code, asm.js...)
  • ...

Preconditions, Part 4 -- Andrzej Krzemieński

Here is Andrzej's final (for now) post on preconditions, posted just 

Preconditions — Part IV

by Andrzej Krzemieński

This is the last post about preconditions. We will try to address concerns about a potential UB connected with expressing preconditions. We will also try to explore how language support for preconditions could look like.

 

...

Such a support for preconditions would be a very helpful feature. But let’s not fantasize too much. For now the best thing we can do is to use assertions and comments -- a very useful and often underestimated language feature.

Universal References (revisited) -- Ben Hekster

A response to Scott Meyers' recent article on Universal References, showing an analogy between &&-collapsing and const-collapsing, and making the counterargument that inventing a new concept may not be needed to clearly explain the standard. It's always interesting to see different experts' takes on how to understand and teach a  feature, particularly a new C++11 feature that we as a community are still absorbing.

Universal References

by Ben Hekster

... The ‘universal reference’ is not a concept you will see defined in the C++ standard, nor is it even something that has any conceptually objective existence in the language or compilation process. It is a construct defined by Meyers in an attempt to make some sense of behavior in the language that he presents as being unexpected or even mysterious. On closer inspection, however, I find that the observed mysterious behavior is actually quite readily explained and has an existing analog that corresponds to already intuitively-understood behavior. ...