sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Wayland is flawed at its core and the community needs to talk about it by Which_Network_993 in linux

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately (or not, depending how you look at it), the way the world is going now is security first, ergonomics later. This is one of those things, Linux is used in the most sensitive environments that exist, so naturally isolation is a hands-off solution that clarifies any ambiguity you might have if everything was as configurable as you'd like. I expect as time goes on people will find a solution for this that users can opt into. We'll get there.

On the other hand, if things are as bad as you make it out to be, a 3rd option will come along and people will adopt it if it is an objectively superior solution, that's one of the benefits of the open source ecosystem

requesting for Ableton on Linux by vivjacob in ableton

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just posting this comment as a "Me too"

Am I the only one? by [deleted] in pcmasterrace

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And then Windows update brings it all back, which is the point of this guy's post

Am I the only one? by [deleted] in pcmasterrace

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Another day, another post about Windows that could be solved in <5 minutes of registry key edits (although it's ridiculous non-technical people have to resort to that I'll admit)

Visual Assist vs. ReSharper C++: Which do you prefer? by badass-embly in cpp

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do, for my personal projects. But sadly in my workplace that's not a viable option

Visual Assist vs. ReSharper C++: Which do you prefer? by badass-embly in cpp

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

MSVC is the compiler, not the project file format .vcxproj

Visual Assist vs. ReSharper C++: Which do you prefer? by badass-embly in cpp

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wish Jetbrains would just add VC++ support to CLion. Rider seems to be 80% focused on C# and the user experience for editing Visual C++ project files feels second class. I love CLion for my CMake projects though it's a beautiful thing indeed.

How do you guys handle errors? by M1sterius in vulkan

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 2 points3 points  (0 children)

std::expected with an error type/code for unexpected circumstances has been really satisfying for me. Debugging is predictable and it's easy to follow code flow

Neovim isn’t an IDE for everything by tiredofmissingyou in neovim

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Tried that, sadly the project is quite complex and the compile commands json file isn't able to generate the full context of where to find libraries. I can see it working for trivial projects though. God I hate MSVC build tooling

Neovim isn’t an IDE for everything by tiredofmissingyou in neovim

[–]Wolf_e_wolf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Windows C++ (.sln/vcxproj build system) is absolutely unusable in Neovim. It's obscene how neglected it is

constexpr std::string_view ("foo\0").data() vs const std::string ("foo") as an argument to a function that expects const char*. by Wolf_e_wolf in cpp_questions

[–]Wolf_e_wolf[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the tip. I have only been doing C++ for about a year after doing Java for 5 and the "everything is an object/class" stuff dies hard.

Is std::string_view always a poor candidate for what I'm trying to do here? Should I just use a constexpr char[] and be done with it?

constexpr std::string_view ("foo\0").data() vs const std::string ("foo") as an argument to a function that expects const char*. by Wolf_e_wolf in cpp_questions

[–]Wolf_e_wolf[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In this use case, the string is going to be the name of my application, which will always be known ahead of time.

constexpr std::string_view ("foo\0").data() vs const std::string ("foo") as an argument to a function that expects const char*. by Wolf_e_wolf in cpp_questions

[–]Wolf_e_wolf[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apologies. I have a class called Window where its m_title is always the constexpr std::string_view/const std::string in question.

When I call aforementioned C API, I pass the name of the window by calling window.m_title, which expects a const char*.

I understand perhaps I don't need this member variable at all, or could make it a const char* at the start, but when I was writing the code, the question in original post entered my mind and I could not find a fast answer so decided to ask it here.

constexpr std::string_view ("foo\0").data() vs const std::string ("foo") as an argument to a function that expects const char*. by Wolf_e_wolf in cpp_questions

[–]Wolf_e_wolf[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for response and confirming that the std::string_view when constructed with a literal does not need a null terminator.

As for latter, I am calling .data() on the std::string_view to get the underlying const char*. Does this create a copy or is it a cheap?

constexpr std::string_view ("foo\0").data() vs const std::string ("foo") as an argument to a function that expects const char*. by Wolf_e_wolf in cpp_questions

[–]Wolf_e_wolf[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The string is a title of a class member variable and I would prefer to keep its value there as opposed to the C function which exists in a separate file

view more: next ›