Hacker News Reader

Comment by cjalmeida | Hacker News Reader

If you think of cpy as high level glue code for "pure" c++ functions, this might work.

I don't like decisions like implicit << and >> for cin, cout. Too much magic for me.

Yeah that implicit operator insertion is a bit odd... but things like automatically inserting an "auto" into declarations seems fair. I'd prefer maintaining "this->" to the "known" keyword.

Yeah, it would make more sense to just add the new line printing shorthands and leave cin/cout/cerr alone. Overloading "for" as a loop over a range of integers also seems questionable, and it seems you'd need to pollute the scope outside of the loop each time you don't want to start from 0.

Honest question, why do you consider implicit << and >> for cin,cout to be too much magic?

It's a misappropriation of an operator. C had a "definition" for them, and this completely disregards that definition. It's one of the biggest things people cry about when custom operators are brought up in other languages, because C++ really dropped the ball here in using operators in a sane way.

And yet we had a few decades of magic 0 literals that transmute into pointers until we finally got a proper nullptr. There's some grade A impurity built directly into the core language and hard to avoid unlike the std lib.

IMO, the usefulness of things like CPY is being easy to read, without too much noise or boilerplate.

(cout "hello") confuses the hell out of those with some C++ experience. It changes semantics if a known object for little gain (cout is callable, a statement)? Like someone else said, a "printout" new statement or function would be better.

It's the kind of things that makes me question the design of the whole language.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com