It makes perfect sense actually. I did write another comment here if you are interested.
This is how operator overloads were written going back to the initial version of C++ back in 1985. The only new thing is that we can now add = default to get the compiler to generate a default implementation that compares all the member variables for you.
Maybe to a non C++ dev, but a lot of C++ is probably incomprehensible to a non C++ dev, just like there are other laguages that are incomprehensible to C++ devs. To me it makes perfect sense as it works just like all the other operator overloads.
auto - let the compiler deduce return type
operator<=> - override the spaceship operator (pretty sure it exists in python too)
(const ClassName&) - compare this class, presumably defined in Class name, with a const reference of type Class name, i.e. its own type.
const - comparison can be made for const objects
= default; - Use the default implementation, which is comparing all the member variables.
An alternate more explicit version, which is actually what people recommend:
auto operator<=>(const ClassName&, const ClassName&) = default;
if I just want to have less than comparison for example I would:
This one makes it explicit that you’re comparing two Class name objects.
if I just want to have less than comparison for example I would:
auto operator<(const ClassName&, const ClassName&) = default;
If I need to compare against another class I could define:
auto operator<(const ClassName&, const OtherClass&)
You mean copy/move constructor and assignment operator?
Unless you have any special handling the ones generated by the compiler automatically should work just fine. But if you do have to define them for some reason (which is becoming increasingly rare) you would need to define both if you need both copy/move construction and copy/move assignment.
I do appreciate how newer C++ standards have made these kinds of things a lot easier too.
Define all comparison operators with just one one line using C++20
auto operator<=>(const ClassName&) const = default;
Looks interesting. I do have a Linux machine for work due to software requirements. I will have a look at void.
I went from using slackware late 90s early 00 to Mac OSX in early/mid 00. When coming back to Linux late 00 early 10s I was so disappointed in the Linux distros. I tried Ubuntu but was very disappointed in the lack of newer versions of third party software in their repo. Tried Arch for a while and while packages were up to date, every now and then the OS updates would mess something up and I had to start troubleshooting.
It might be better now, but I eventually gave up and went to FreeBSD about 10 years ago. Stable base and separate up to date third party feels like the best of both worlds. Not sure if any llinux distro offers something like that now. No snap, no flatpack, just a base os and up to third party date packages.
What you observes could be OS depended,. Vim has its own copy paste buffers (y,p etc) and the OS has its own. Traditionally highligh to copy and middle mouse button to paste on Unix. Windows has 2 methods, ctrl-c,v but those are also bindings in vim so only the older less known crtl-insert,shirt-insert works.
Copy paste is definitely built in, there is no need for extra plugins.
You mean you couldn’t copy some text from vim and paste it into another application? if yes, what did you have to install/configure for that? I’ve never had any issues copy paste from/to vim, console/GUI windows/Unix.
1 FreeBSD server with zfs mirror for storage and various server software
1 FreeBSD laptop for development
1 Linux laptop for software that doesn’t support FreeBSD
1 Linux desktop for work.
The rest of the family is 100% windows though :/
Got to tweak dos startup menu to maximise your conventional or ems memory.