Talk:C++11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Incorrect example for regular expression.[edit]

It seems to be incorrect.

Ref-qualifiers not listed[edit]

There is a new feature in C++11 that isn't listed on this page, adding ref-qualifiers to member functions.

i.e.

class A
{
public:
  void LvalueOnly() &;
  void RvalueOnly() &&;
};

A().RvalueOnly();
A a;
a.LvalueOnly();
a.RvalueOnly(); //bad call

Paper: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2439.htm

50.35.73.36 (talk) 23:10, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

References to C++03 language[edit]

I disagree with the comparisons to a "C++03" language in the article. AFAIK there has never been such a thing, and no compiler have ever supported a C++03 version of C++. They have supported C++98 until the switched to the next version of the core language C++11. There was no changes to the language itself in between, only errata to the C++98 standard.Carewolf (talk) 13:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Then what is this: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=38110 which is titled ISO/IEC 14882:2003 Programming languages -- C++? Do they publish an entirely new standards document just to handle errata?
franl | talk17:54, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Pseudorandom number generation looks incorrect[edit]

uniform_real_distribution is misleading. It links to a general discussion of uniform distributions, in which x is generated as a <= x <= b. But the C++ implementation provides a <= x < b, which is more in line with what programmers expect. This sent me searching for another (nonexistent) option in C++ to provide < b. I didn't change the page but I think someone may want to check this out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.32.192.41 (talk) 15:24, 25 June 2018 (UTC)