gui_starter_template VS polars

Was checking that as well, can't find it indeed. I would recommend looking into the following: https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/gui_starter_template

gui_starter_template. This is a C++ Best Practices GitHub template for getting up and running with C++ quickly.

Next to language versions, spend time setting up your build system (CMake?) with all bells and whistles. You want unit tests, clang-tidy, include-what-you-use, sanitizers, fuzzing, clang-format, package managers. Just take a look at https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/gui_starter_template

https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/gui_starter_template from Jason Turner (aka lefticus) is quite a popular one (2.1k stars in Github)

I actually just tried to play around with what seems to be a "modern c++" boilerplate project.

It uses CMake, conan for packaging, clang-tidy and cpp-check, and has templates for fuzz and unit testing[1].

I found it because qtcreator and kdevelop were weirdly clunky and created partly broken qt projects and I figured I wanted to add a package manager and qt to the mix.

The template looks really fancy, but it's so incredibly slow, to the point of being unusable.

It's a ramble yes. But the point is modern C++ tools seem to have added some niceties to the language, but they also brought more of the main C++ issues, i.e. slow compile times and nasty boilerplate in the build process. Yes, I realize CMake isn't modern and there are a bunch of new build tools.

[1] https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/gui_starter_template

Clang-tidy file of the C++ Project Template

For cmake i find this useful: https://cliutils.gitlab.io/modern-cmake/ https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/gui_starter_template

Jason Turner (known from cppcast) has following project: https://github.com/cpp-best-practices/cpp_starter_project

this is a cpp_question, but anyway, I think this is exactly what you're looking for. Credits go to Jason Turner.

This is because 0.1 is in actuality the floating point value value 0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625, and thus 1 divided by it is ever so slightly smaller than 10. Nevertheless, fpround(1 / fpround(1 / 10)) = 10 exactly.

I found out about this recently because in Polars I defined a // b for floats to be (a / b).floor(), which does return 10 for this computation. Since Python's correctly-rounded division is rather expensive, I chose to stick to this (more context: https://github.com/pola-rs/polars/issues/14596#issuecomment-...).

https://github.com/pola-rs/polars/releases/tag/py-0.19.0

That turned out to be related to pola-rs/polars#11912, and this linked comment provided a deceptively simple solution - use PARSE_DECLTYPES when creating the connection: