Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> How about this one: "C++ is horrible because of implicit copy constructors"? That one's not in C :-).

I also mentioned compatibility with C semantics.

"The Design and Evolution of C++" contains lots of such examples.



C doesn't implicitly convert one struct into another. Why implicitly convert one class into another just because I created a constructor in one class that takes the other class as a parameter? The "explicit" keyword should have been "implicit", with the default behavior reversed.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: