Can a compiled C++11 library (lib,dll,etc.) be linked in older C++ compilers?
Could older C++ compilers (e.g. VS2008 and gcc3.4) link with external libraries written in C++11?
I am a beginner. Can I directly start learning C++11? or I have to learn old C++? [closed]
Closed 10 years ago.
What is use of universal character names in identifiers in C++
The C++ standard (I noticed it in the new one, but it did already exist in C++03) specifies universal character names, written as uNNNN and UNNNNNNNN and representing the characters with unicode codepoints NNNN/NNNNNNNN. This is useful with string literals, especially since explicitly UTF-8, UTF-16 and UCS-4 string literals are also defined. However, the universal character literals are also allowed in identifiers. What is the motivation behind that?
How to setup the c++ rule of three in a virtual base class
I am trying to create a pure virtual base class (or simulated pure virtual)
How do you pronounce the ‘…’ operator [closed]
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for […]
C++11 support for higher-order list functions
Most functional programming languages (e.g. Common Lisp, Scheme / Racket, Clojure, Haskell, Scala, Ocaml, SML) support some common higher-order functions on lists, such as map, filter, takeWhile, dropWhile, foldl, foldr (see e.g. Common Lisp, Scheme / Racket, Clojure side-by-side reference sheet, the Haskell, Scala, OCaml, and the SML documentation.)
How to make the switch to C++11?
I’ve been programming in C++ for a while now, but mostly things centered around the low-level features of C++. By that I mean mostly working with pointers and raw arrays. I think this behavior is known as using C++ as C with classes. Despite this, I only having tried C recently for the first time. I was pleasantly surprised how languages like C# and Java hide these details away in convenient standard library classes like Dictionaries and Lists.
Simplifying C++11 optimal parameter passing when a copy is needed
It seems to me that in C++11 lots of attention was made to simplify returning values from functions and methods, i.e.: with move semantics it’s possible to simply return heavy-to-copy but cheap-to-move values (while in C++98/03 the general guideline was to use output parameters via non-const references or pointers), e.g.:
Did C++11 address concerns passing std lib objects between dynamic/shared library boundaries? (ie dlls and so)?
One of my major complaints about C++ is how hard in practice it is to pass std library objects outside of dynamic library (ie dll/so) boundaries.
How do .so files avoid problems associated with passing header-only templates like MS dll files have?
Based on the discussion around this question. I’d like to know how .so files/the ELF format/the gcc toolchain avoid problems passing classes defined purely in header files (like the std library). According to Jan in that answer, the dynamic linker/loader only picks one version of such a class to load if its defined in two .so files. So if two .so files have two definitions, perhaps with different compiler options/etc, the dynamic linker can pick one to use.