Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

9
  • 7
    I understand your argument, i personally don't understand why it has to be so difficult, honestly this is the reason why we lose so many programmers to Java, there it just works out of the box! These are base features which make c++ guys lose time!
    – Oliver
    Commented Dec 18, 2016 at 0:38
  • I might just add, i find this the best solution but i guess for some people it needs a lot of brain to understand all the steps, especially for beginners... ;)! I see 80% of C++ programmers fail when they see typedef'ed stuff.
    – Oliver
    Commented Dec 18, 2016 at 1:26
  • 1
    @OliverStutz that's the danger of being first. The most recent C++ standards have been trying desperately to make things less burdensome, my favorite is the auto keyword. I'm surprised they haven't tried to tackle 2D arrays, especially since Boost has already shown the way. Commented Dec 18, 2016 at 4:20
  • it's funny how the whole development automation was slept in. Now the only easy out of the box advantage is java. I would really like c++ to take a leap, it has been a mighty and powerful language since ever... why having a lightsaber if you don't use it!
    – Oliver
    Commented Dec 18, 2016 at 14:21
  • 3
    What's bugging me even more is how far C++ is behind C in this: C99 allows for real multidimensional arrays allocated on the heap with dimensions defined at run time, and C++17 still does not come close to what C99 allows... Commented Apr 25, 2017 at 14:35