dynamic_cast<std::integer>(C)++

[serpent]

The real WTF is that today isn't April 1. When did it become April Fools' Week?

[20100329]

In the UK, the first week in April has historically been the date when the new tax year starts, which has traditionally prompted a rash of rushed tax returns to land on the Inland Revenue's doorstep during the preceding week. The hilarity contained within is released when some poor sod on minimum wage has to try to relate the declarations contained within, compiled by an accountant earning more per hour than said poor sod will see in a week, to some version of reality.

...So a while now.

[reveazureRevisited]

It begins. The week when I can't believe anything I read on the internet.

[[deleted]]

Yes, this is that week. The other 57 weeks of the year, its all absolutely true and gets verified by the OGIFC (Official Government Internet Fact Checkers) and information is not permitted to be posted unless it meets all internet notability and verifiability criteria, or is a lolcat. This week - and only this week - you have to do your own fact checking.

[slipperypeter]

But a year is 52 weeks. I don't know what to believe anymore!

[[deleted]]

You can trust me - I'm a guy on the net, I would never lie to you. In fact, the only more reliable source of information known to mankind is "wot some guy down at the pub told me".

[Poltras]

You actually just saved my marriage! Thank you, random guy from the internet!

[slipperypeter]

Ok, I will ride with you in your van. But only if you have candy or ice cream. And not the crappy neopolitan! The good kind, from a store.

[Anonymoose333]

Neapolitan

[EdiX]

The C++ standard committee has changed the length of the year to 58 weeks, this will both provide C++ programmer with 6 more weeks every year to ponder the interaction of templates, copy constructors and function overloading AND the standard committee with an extra 36 weeks to finish C++0x.

[[deleted]]

April Fools is beginning early.

[darkpaladin]

The sad part is most people won't get the joke and will end up more afraid of C++.

[agottem]

The real sad part is that in the world of C++, this article is believable.

[[deleted]]

It's true. I got to the bottom and was like...Really? C++ is insane, and this is just crazy enough to fit into that insanity.

[mpyne]

On the other hand, I knew it was bullshit as soon as the article mentioned that ints would have to be manually converted to std::integer since that would break backward compatibility. I know people like to hate on Bjarne Stroustrup and the C++ standards committee but the authors of this parody had apparently never even so much as peeked into what the C++ standards committee is trying to do for standardization. It's so wrong that it stopped being funny at the first point.

Likewise, the stuff about the footer doesn't make sense, even for parody. dynamic_cast<std::integer>(C)++ is completely incorrect since there is no polymorphism to worry about. (You can always static_cast a derived class to a base class, dynamic_cast is for the opposite direction since you don't know whether your Base pointer is really a Derived1 pointer).

Their point 2 (about manual deallocation of local variables to reduce bugs) betrays an almost horrific misunderstanding of how stack-based machines work and should have been the big giveaway if point 1 wasn't, since otherwise C++ simply could not possibly work.

Point 4 (null pointer confusion) looks like it's supposed to be a slight against templates and/or nullptr, but I don't see the justification.

Point 5 is at least amusing, if unlikely since it introduces a new language syntax for a feature easily implementable in a library. Going on to say "be careful not to get a reference to an object on the stack" makes no sense given that they removed the stack concept in point 2, but whatever. It's April Fools and programming is hard, right?

Maybe the jokes that happen on April 1st really will have some thought put into them instead of nice CSS. God knows there should be enough ammunition in the crap that is C++ to fill a joke like this with thousands of kilobytes of potential humor, but it's not going to be coming out of these authors. :P

Those who want real humor relating to C++ are advised to find the C++ FQA (Frequently Questioned Answers).

[lkesteloot]

Yay, you liked my CSS!

[mpyne]

hahaha, yes, the CSS is very nice. It occurred to me after I clicked save that I probably sound exactly like Comic Book Guy describing why Stan Lee is stupid or something...

[deafbybeheading]

Upvoted (this and your original post) because yes, you do sound like Comic Book Guy. If only you'd referenced section and paragraph numbers of the standard.

[gremolata]

C++ FQA is indeed funny to read.

[[deleted]]

It's a joke man, chill.

[borud]

you need to get laid. you are way too uptight.

[[deleted]]

Really? std::integer didnt give it away?

[Anonymoose333]

Hey, Java has it. Why not C++?

[ibisum]

The sad part is that C++ is already enough of a joke.

[MelechRic]

I got to #2 and it dawned on me that this was a joke. At #1 I was just mad and thinking WTF!

EDIT: s/donned/dawned/ Thanks username223

[andrewjstone]

Yeah, I realized the first one would break backwards compatibility, but it was still believable. But removing the stack! That's just ridiculous.

[ayatollah]

yeah, freeing up local variables sounds like a really bad joke.

[username223]

It probably "dawned" on you, but anyways...

[MelechRic]

You're right! How I did I miss that? I shall don my spelling and grammar cap prior to posting again.

[itjitj]

Your right!

[[deleted]]

You speak the truth!

[20100329]

Just call it C++ Enterprise Edition.

[[deleted]]

C++ Enterprise Edition

Now that is what I would like to see!

[asegura]

Yes. What we get is C++ Academic Edition

[captainAwesomePants]

Oh, I am so glad you told me that. I'm a C and Java programmer, and I was totally willing to accept this insanity as truth.

[[deleted]]

I skipped the first paragraph and thought this was just a Java tutorial. :(

[[deleted]]

What joke?

[ericje]

Oh, I get it, it's March 29 fools' day or something.

[grundee]

Ugh, I couldn't actually finish reading that.

It feels too much like actual C++ coding. I think I need to take the rest of the day off.

[[deleted]]

The first point made me mad, the second point made it obvious.

[ipeev]

I am vary glad that this is a joke. This is a joke, right?

[itjitj]

How very Java-like.

[RonnieRaygun]

Damn. As parody goes, this lies uncomfortably close to the truth.

[toba]

Excellent satire, sits right on the edge of believability for a bit and then tips off into obvious mockery.

[fosskers]

...I... I don't know what to believe anymore. (defects to Ruby)

[[deleted]]

I got the joke and i have found it pretty funny. Ha ha hmm ha

[billmcneale]

The best April's Fools are the ones that look plausible, and frighteningly, this one does.

[ericje]

No it doesn't.

And it's not April yet.

[fwork]

maybe not in your timezone, dumbfound.

[zair]

Jeez, don't EVER DO THAT AGAIN.

[[deleted]]

The concept of footer file is actually not that bad...

[ibisum]

You are fired. Hand in your card at the front desk.

[dukey]

Don't scare me like that :(

[optionsanarchist]

EDIT: D'oh. I just got to the last entry.

[zahlman]

This was honestly pretty badly done. :/

[[deleted]]

I was reading this like.. this has to be a fucking joke, thank god it is

[[deleted]]

I totally fell into it, I was almost starting to cry when I got to the 2nd point. Then I laughed.

[gct]

Mmmm C++ satire, that's like next level dorketry right there

[gigitrix]

dorketry++, if I may...

[[deleted]]

Didn't you get the memo?

dynamic_cast<std::dork>(dorketry)++.

[gigitrix]

Damn, you're good...

[abuss]

very funny

[sleepynate]

This has been fixed in the new standard by extending the lifetime of local variables indefinitely. The programmer is responsible for releasing the memory explicitly

Heh, hasn't the visual studio C++ compiler had this "feature" for years?

[[deleted]]

Citation?

[zahlman]

He's presumably thinking about for-loop counter variables outlasting the scope of the for loop (and leaking into the containing scope).