Language: g++ Source: #include <iostream> auto main() -> int { std::cout << "Hello World" << std::endl; return 0; } Result: Hello World

Language: g++ Source: #include <iostream> auto main() -> decltype(123) { std::cout << "Hello World" << std::endl; return 0; } Result: Hello World

I'm sure this will work in every implementation which supports modern standards

Well... not so surprised

It's no magic, but it looks silly and more cpp'ish

Field application engineer or software developer which domain has a better value??

Hi guys. Is there an elegant way to do reverse iteration in range-based for loop? Checked google but not satisfied with the answer: https://stackoverflow.com/q/8542591/824501

I mean, is there any built-in function so that I can write for (auto& i: built_in_reverse(something)) {...}

I mean, is there any built-in function so that I can write for (auto& i: built_in_reverse(something)) {...}

Hmm, std::reverse maybe?

Hmm, std::reverse maybe?

does it modify the content?

or is it slow?

does it modify the content?

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/reverse

It does, and I think it's as performant as it can be

It does, and I think it's as performant as it can be

Hmm then it's not equivalent to reverse iteration

So we still have to write for (auto p = v.rbegin(); p != v.rend(); ++p) instead, it seems

boost::adaptors::reverse

Hmm then it's not equivalent to reverse iteration

Maybe something like for (vector<foo>::reverse_iterator i = bar.rbegin(); i != bar.rend(); ++i)

boost::adaptors::reverse

already seen that stackoverflow answer but ... hasn't the standard implemented its own one

Maybe something like for (vector<foo>::reverse_iterator i = bar.rbegin(); i != bar.rend(); ++i)

OK~

I'm not sure if every container implements reverse_iterator, but its the last idea I can get

I'm not sure if every container implements reverse_iterator, but its the last idea I can get

Hmm std::reverse_iterator<> works on every iterator except stashing iterators it seems

I'm not sure if every container implements reverse_iterator, but its the last idea I can get

😂 without this, the range based loop looks stupid

Hi guys. Is there an elegant way to do reverse iteration in range-based for loop? Checked google but not satisfied with the answer: https://stackoverflow.com/q/8542591/824501

https://wandbox.org/permlink/qLMcxhAO8bzJkpJK

not a ranged-based for, definitely, not even for loop

not a ranged-based for, definitely, not even for loop

Thanks, it's so javascript!

Thanks, it's so javascript!

Mhmm, it's so easy to write unreadable code in cpp. I mean, it uses modern features but it's ugly as fuck

Mhmm, it's so easy to write unreadable code in cpp. I mean, it uses modern features but it's ugly as fuck

Totally

（ I'd rather read IOCCC

Thanks

Mhmm, it's so easy to write unreadable code in cpp. I mean, it uses modern features but it's ugly as fuck

Normally you would use ranges instead of the reverse iterator

Normally you would use ranges instead of the reverse iterator

How do you define "normally"? There are situations where you use the iterators and situations where you use ranges

I only think this example is more unreadable

How do you define "normally"? There are situations where you use the iterators and situations where you use ranges

Ranges are made to be replacement for iterators, as in complete replacement

Yo big ludo

Yo big ludo

Yo small kurimi

Yo small kurimi

You're supposed to say little not small

You're supposed to say little not small

But u smoll thingy '-'

But u smoll thingy '-'

Uh okay then

Ranges are made to be replacement for iterators, as in complete replacement

do you have link?

But u smoll thingy '-'

I got yesterday my gadgets

do you have link?

https://www.fluentcpp.com/2018/02/09/introduction-ranges-library/

I saw boost has an extension like this:

for (auto i : irange(0, 10)) {}

for (auto i : irange(0, 10)) {}

It is not just that

is std planing to do something like that?

Ranges are made to be replacement for iterators, as in complete replacement

Hmm, I still would use iterators if you need to iterate over every second element for example

It is not just that

what more?

for(auto i : my_vec | range::view::reverse() )

Hmm, I still would use iterators if you need to iterate over every second element for example

True

Else I would agree, there are more situations where ranges are more elegant

Else I would agree, there are more situations where ranges are more elegant

But that is mainly because iterators are truly not elegant

Hmm, I still would use iterators if you need to iterate over every second element for example

But you could make a skip range for that tho

for(auto i : my_vec | range::view::reverse() )

Oh? this looks cool!

Anyone want to share c/ c++ projects I will be pleased github etc

Anyone want to share c/ c++ projects I will be pleased github etc

#googleit

Srsly don't be rude

Github offers you to take a look on projects you may be interested in

I just want inspiration as a young developer

you can take a look on my server https://github.com/luckyycode/neko-webframework

kek

Thax

May I finish it

no

OK

you can take a look on my server https://github.com/luckyycode/neko-webframework

This is yours?

yus, still wip

Wip?

work in progress

Ooh

It's nice

You are great :)

you can take a look on my server https://github.com/luckyycode/neko-webframework

Nice! Starred ⭐

That server is pretty stinking cool

you can take a look on my server https://github.com/luckyycode/neko-webframework

top kek

Indeed