Made with KolourPaint and screenshots from Kate (with the GitHub theme).

  • @pivot_root@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    11
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    Rust is verbose, but C++ might still take the cake with its standard library templates. Especially when using fully-qualified type names…

    auto a = ::std::make_shared<::std::basic_string<char, ::std::char_traits<char>, MyAllocator<char>>>();

    A reference-counted shared pointer to a string of unspecified character encoding and using a non-default memory allocator.

      • @pivot_root@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        std::string doesn’t have a template type for the allocator. You are stuck using the verbose basic_string type if you need a special allocator.

        But, of course, nobody sane would write that by hand every time. They would use a typedef, like how std::string is just a typedef for std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>. Regardless, the C++ standard library is insanely verbose when you start dropping down into template types and using features at an intermediate level. SFINAE in older versions of C++ was mindfuck on the best of days, for example.

        Don’t get me wrong, though. I’m not saying Rust is much better. Its saving grace is its type inference in let expressions. Without it, chaining functional operations on iterators would be an unfathomable hellscape of Collect<Skip<Map<vec::Iter<Item = &'a str>>>>

        • @Ajen@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          47 hours ago

          Yeah, I missed the custom allocator at first. I thought I deleted my comment fast enough, but I guess you were faster. :)