and you have complex return types

ofcourse you will use auto, you will not define everything 🙂

You'd be better off using typedef I'd say, but I see what you mean

You'd be better off using typedef I'd say, but I see what you mean

you don’t need to once you use auto

you don’t need to once you use auto

Or you don't need auto once you use typedefs (or better using). I mean, explicit types..

Or you don't need auto once you use typedefs (or better using). I mean, explicit types..

I like this one better tbh

It's more verbose, easier to work with

Who know's small mail client on C (send mail only). If was source - thanks

Who know's small mail client on C (send mail only). If was source - thanks

sendmail

sendmail

mail client 😉 not smtp service 😉

So complete mua?

yes

source need's on C

Complete mua for sending email only?

But you dont want SMTP sender

Yes, and add other code on C

So you dont want sendmail

Yes, i can emulate "telnet hello or other on systemD (cmd) call ?

Because sendmail is SMTP enail client but you don't want that cuz you say it is SMTP service?

I know, yes

I am quite confused, what do you want then?

I want samples as in GO code but on C package go_mail_client type MailClient interface { // Sends email Send(email, subject, body string) error }

With not use system(cmd) for call MTA

I want samples as in GO code but on C package go_mail_client type MailClient interface { // Sends email Send(email, subject, body string) error }

what?

what?

I find https://github.com/somnisoft/smtp-client

So you dont want mail client in C but you want mail library for C

Yes, you right

Yes, you right

Why though?!

This is weird. C is not the best option for these kind of things.

Use python

With not use system(cmd) for call MTA

Here are some examples of sending emails in different languages: https://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Send_email

Here are some examples of sending emails in different languages: https://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Send_email

Thanks

@admin

guys anyone know online judges for cracking the coding interview

@MSAV c or c++?

C

Do Gcc or clang support string literal as template parameter yet?

Do Gcc or clang support string literal as template parameter yet?

You can check new C++ features support on cppreference

You can check new C++ features support on cppreference

Yeah, it's there since GCC 9

You can check new C++ features support on cppreference

But I thought it was just a simple template<const char* lit> myClass and then just call myClass<"Hello, world">

Yeah, it's there since GCC 9

I doubt it

It requires constexpr std::string

But I thought it was just a simple template<const char* lit> myClass and then just call myClass<"Hello, world">

Because my GCC 10.2 complains about it with error: non-type template argument does not refer to any declaration error: ‘"Hello, world"’ is not a valid template argument for type ‘const char*’ because string literals can never be used in this context 54 | int main() { test<"Hello, world"> te; } | ^

I doubt it

The cppreference refers to this proposal http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2018/p0732r2.pdf

The cppreference refers to this proposal http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2018/p0732r2.pdf

>proposal

It requires constexpr std::string

And it's not supported yet constexpr std::string is not a string literal🤔

>proposal

Yes?

Yes?

So it's not in the standard

It's just that. A proposal

So it's not in the standard

Check the proposal date it was from the 2018 and it is accepted If it wasn't it wouldn't be on the C++20 compiler support list

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support/20 check for Class types in non-type template parameters in C++20 feature section

Do Gcc or clang support string literal as template parameter yet?

It supports this library https://github.com/hanickadot/compile-time-regular-expressions So it should work.

It supports this library https://github.com/hanickadot/compile-time-regular-expressions So it should work.

yeah that's I why I wondered it But It doesn't seem simple to use it just like template<const char*>

But I thought it was just a simple template<const char* lit> myClass and then just call myClass<"Hello, world">

integers, floating point types, and class types with constexpr constructors are supported

yeah that's I why I wondered it But It doesn't seem simple to use it just like template<const char*>

this should work struct char_ptr { const char *m_data = nullptr; constexpr char_ptr(const char *data) : m_data(data) {} };

this should work struct char_ptr { const char *m_data = nullptr; constexpr char_ptr(const char *data) : m_data(data) {} };

oh even this works struct char_ptr { constexpr char_ptr(const char *) {} };

Do Gcc or clang support string literal as template parameter yet?

Not natively

But you can go around it

Just make a struct containing a String

I mean it’s not that big of a probelm 😅

I'm having a doubt in java can some help me...?😅

Yeah what an interesting way to write 'Java'

I'm having a doubt in java can some help me...?😅

We all do

Yeah what an interesting way to write 'Java'

I asked the doubt in the java groups mentioned in @en_it_chats but no one is replying..

We all do

Thanks brother...🙏 I got the answer

this should work struct char_ptr { const char *m_data = nullptr; constexpr char_ptr(const char *data) : m_data(data) {} };

Yes I did something similar to this like: template <std::size_t N> struct StringLiteral { constexpr StringLiteral(const char (&str)[N]) { std::copy(str, N, value); } char value[N]; }; template <StringLiteral lit> struct test {}; auto main() -> int { test<"Hello, world"> t; return 0; } But didn't work same goes for your example

I have a question. Before, C++ was considered "C with Classes". Is it still the case? I mean, is there something you can do with C++ that you can't do with C? I C++ still a C version?

I have a question. Before, C++ was considered "C with Classes". Is it still the case? I mean, is there something you can do with C++ that you can't do with C? I C++ still a C version?

It was called C with classes only at the very beginning. It's not C with classes for very long time. C++ is evolving much quicker and is significantly larger than C.

It was called C with classes only at the very beginning. It's not C with classes for very long time. C++ is evolving much quicker and is significantly larger than C.

True 😅.

I have a question. Before, C++ was considered "C with Classes". Is it still the case? I mean, is there something you can do with C++ that you can't do with C? I C++ still a C version?

you can do anything with any programming language

so the question you should ask is: “is there any benefits in using c++ over c?” the answer is yes, there are many benefits, examples: Lambads Auto keyword Templates Exception handling Function overloading Object oriented programming

And most of the things you can do in c, you can do in c++

BUT this is a sword with two edges. If you want to make low level programs(i.e. operating systems, version control, etc…) YOU SHOULD USE C. It’s because you won’t use most of the features of c++, it will just be an pain in the ass for no reason. Other than that use c++.

also most low level programs ar written in C

BUT this is a sword with two edges. If you want to make low level programs(i.e. operating systems, version control, etc…) YOU SHOULD USE C. It’s because you won’t use most of the features of c++, it will just be an pain in the ass for no reason. Other than that use c++.

> it will just be an overhead for no reason Such statements should be proofed Do you have any?

How to calculate 1039 * 3749 * 8473 in C++?

> it will just be an overhead for no reason Such statements should be proofed Do you have any?

c++ coding standards are different than c

How to calculate 1039 * 3749 * 8473 in C++?

Seriously?!

c++ coding standards are different than c

So?

Seriously?!

uint64_t(1039 * 3749 * 8473) warning: overflow in expression; result is -1355615565 with type 'int'

you will need to account for that