this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2025
90 points (89.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

26372 readers
1156 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
anzo@programming.dev
Feyter@programming.dev
BurningTurtle@programming.dev
pylapp@programming.dev
90
Low effort meme (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 day ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Wdym? They're so good they even got backported to C in C23

You know how often C gets big features like that? I mean to get auto they had to basically deprecate a keyword (well, sort of)

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't get it. What's wrong with constexpr? It's vastly preferable to macros due to type safety, and const due to compile-time optimization.

[–] RustyNova@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I don't get it either. OP might be angry at compile time (Couldn't be worse than rust)

[–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Rust doesn't allow type inference in function signatures, c++ does with auto. IIRC, they recommended against using it, because of -you guessed it- compile time.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Yeah, Rust already has major compile time issues.

[–] RustyNova@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

TBH I thought it was for refactoring type safety. Making sure that the type is understood and not ready to just change wildly accidentally.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I thought that was part of the point - simplifying refactoring.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not fair to compare it to the very immature Rust.

[–] RustyNova@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I do love rust. But I do like making fun of it too.

Although I don't see how rust is immature? Unless I missed the joke?

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Well, compared to grandpa C++ over there...

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It's very young for a programming language, and is still rapidly evolving.

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

It's more than 10 years old. It has stable syntax, big standard library, big library ecosystem, plenty of rust programs already in production.

If by "evolving" you mean "changing", I don't think that is an issue at all. At most, they add features. They don't change or remove. And with the editions system, it should be no issue.

If by "evolving" you mean "improving", then I don't see how that could ever be an issue.

[–] anti_antidote@lemmy.zip -1 points 1 day ago

It's only a third of the age of C amirite 🙄

[–] aaaaaaaaargh@feddit.org 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What!? constexpr is one of the best additions to C++ ever since. And I do like auto even though I get why some folks can't stand it.

[–] ulterno@programming.dev -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's so good that reality is flaking at the edges because of using constexpr auto x = whatever().

[–] aaaaaaaaargh@feddit.org 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Well... and what would be the meta templating equivalent to this statement?

[–] ulterno@programming.dev -2 points 18 hours ago

Yeah, it’s so good that reality is flaking at the edges because of using