I agree. Right now only people who care about the most modern versions of C++ are using it, so I had to revert back to source/includes for this project :(
For me its not just that some of the documentation is like that, its that some programmers ACTUALLY write confusing ass code that looks like that lol. I mean great, but now i have to spend the next couple of hours figuring out what the hell is going on /facePalm
This page is *not* the documentation page of C++. (facepalm). Neither it is designed for beginners. (facepalm). Just buy a book or go to a tutorial pages or yt videos.
It's a reference. Spells in the name itself. As a professional C++ developer, it's an invaluable resource to me: it's concise, detailed and thoroughly updated. Every detail mentioned in those function signatures are important for a library user. As for this particular example, it's not meant to teach you move semantics and just documents std::forward and it's usage.
Nah I'm sure Crow is better to use from an API pov, I picked Oat++ because it's also a very popular one. Oat++ and Crow are fairly suitable, but they have different APIs. Crow's happens to be simpler
I've got a few questions about QT if possible: I'm currently working on a terminal text editor somewhat like vim in the terminal using a UI library that I've written. However, some of the things I want to do I think might be easier to do in a GUI instead, akin to how emacs works. I'm thinking of picking up QT (I want to work on some kind of GUI app in the future anyway). On one hand, I don't want to have wasted a year's worth of learning and work... But still, the more practical questions: With your experience in QT, how themable is it? How easy is it to work with UIs that open and close different widgets -- I assume it's going to be pretty easy in general. Have you worked with QTextEdit at all? It looks like it'll do a lot of what I want it to do already. I think the only thing that's really putting me off ATM is just how OOP the application would have to be to use QT, it looks like. Also, how much do you need to use GLFW? I spotted that some of the code in the preexisting project you started with appeared to use OpenGL functions? But I might be wrong there. Any thoughts or opinions would be greatly appreciated. :)
To be fair, as a beginner you have ten thousand other things to worry about before std::forward becomes relevant to you and when it does you're no longer a beginner.
Just talk, man. Don't add sound effects. We all need to knock off the beeps and hoops and clicks and camera shutter sounds and all that. Everyone is doing it and it's freaking annoying and unnecessary.
That is not a c++ official documentation page. Its not meant for noobs either. Stick to google and “simple” copy paste programs or chatgpt if you want easy answers..
Only just discovered Slint. I've been coding C/C++ for Arduino for 5 years (Mug level) but keen to broaden my skills to simple apps and it looks like quite readable cod and great docs. So, here I am at your video.
If someone who codes in C++ for 10 years "barely knows the language", then Idk who you class as "experienced". Besides the bad assumption, care to share what beginners should actually be looking at for C++ documentation instead of the top documentation website for C++?
Thanks, for giving me a problem. Soon, I will provide a solution for this problem. By making cpp documentations in a simple and easy to get as beginner way 🎉
@codingwithmat "Professional C++" by Marc Grégoire is in my opinion the C++ documentation for beginners, I mean I haven't seen anything compared to that book, no blabla, more practical and realistic exercises, you name it. About the documentation itself, I believe that using a documentation-friendly app like DevDocs can help to improve the readability of the C++ documentation, the code example is better presented(color, possibility to change the font, etc) and with that app, searching a function signature is better compared to cppreference.
Hard, hard, *hard* disagree. I find cppreference to be one of the most superb references out there. Very little clutter, particularly for the standard library specs. And others have raised a very good point as well in this comment section; that it's not "documentation" in the regular sense. It's not a tutorial on how to write C++.
You've done an excellent job of explaining the stack in a concise and efficient manner. There are so many other tutorials that just go off on a tangent and try to include everything into the stack. You've stuck to the basics. Good Job 👍
