cppbestpractices VS CppCoreGuidelines

Turn on warnings-as-errors (-Werror or /WX). There’s a good list of recommended warnings in Jason’s book: https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/cppbestpractices

Take a look at: https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/cppbestpractices/blob/master/02-Use_the_Tools_Available.md

Collaborative Collection of C++ Best Practices. This online resource is part of Jason Turner's collection of C++ Best Practices resources. By the way, since I mentioned Jason, here's the link to his C++ Weakly channel.

This goes for C++ as well, there exist a host of off-by-default flags/features that make it a lot easier to make safe code in C++. Jason Turner's cpp best practices is a must read, using the sanitizers is another must, using facilities like g++'s _GLIBCXX_DEBUG and _GLIBCXX_DEBUG_PEDANTIC or MSVC's /GS /RTCs is a must.

Could you detail what exact tooling you are talking about ?

Like, this static analyzer looks interesting but 5 years ago clang --analyze had no trouble producing me a nice html indicating the 27 steps across 6 functions that lead to a pointer being dereferenced after being deleted. Tooling is there but it seems that pretty much no one is aware of it - see e.g. this: https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/cppbestpractices/blob/... or this: https://github.com/fffaraz/awesome-cpp for a quick look at what exists.

Also, be sure to turn on the warnings from this page (under the compilers section).*

Yep: https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/cppbestpractices/blob/master/02-Use_the_Tools_Available.md

If you aren't aware of the c++ core guidelines[1] - it should be on your radar.

Also, it might not be a popular opinion, but I think Bjarne's books are just fine.

A Tour of C++ (3rd edition) [2]

Principles and Practice Using C++ (3rd Edition) was just published in april 2023 [3]

[1] https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppC...

You need to talk to Bjarne and Herb...

"C++ Core Guidelines" - https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines

In addition to the other comments -

TypeScript deliberately takes a "good enough" approach to improving JavaScript, instead of designing an ideal but incompatible approach. For example, its handling of [function parameter bivariance](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/type-compatibil...) is unsound but works much better with the existing JavaScript ecosystem. By contrast, a more academic functional programming language would guarantee a sound type system but would be a huge shift from JavaScript.

By analogy, Herb Sutter is arguing that something like the [C++ Core Guidelines](https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines), with tooling help in this new Cpp2 syntax, can bring real improvements to safety. Something like Rust's borrow checker would bring much stricter guarantees, backed by academic research and careful design, but would be incompatible and a huge adjustment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2olsGf6JIkU

Take a look at Effective Modern c++ by Scott Meyers and the ISO c++ core guidelines. These resources are great for learning how to write better, more modern C++. I don't think it would be hard to grasp if you're already familiar with the language, just make sure to actually write some code which makes use of this stuff, otherwise it's easy to forget.

Look to the C++ Core Guidelines. It's not perfect, it has some flaws, including some sabotaging advice apparently adopted for political reasons. But at least it has some C++ authorities (Bjarne and Herb) as authors.