include-what-you-use
STL
Our great sponsors
include-what-you-use | STL | |
---|---|---|
39 | 154 | |
3,819 | 9,732 | |
2.4% | 1.6% | |
9.4 | 9.7 | |
5 days ago | about 11 hours ago | |
C++ | C++ | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
include-what-you-use
- IWYU: A tool for use with Clang to analyze includes in C and C++ source files
-
Script to find missing std includes in C++ headers
Interesting...how does it compare to https://github.com/include-what-you-use/include-what-you-use ?
-
Speed Up C++ Compilation
Build Insights in Visual Studio, include-what-you-use).
Looks like https://include-what-you-use.org/ might do that.
-
Is it good or bad practice to include headers that are indirectly included from other headers?
If you are worried about includes, use https://github.com/include-what-you-use/include-what-you-use and stop thinking about it.
-
how do you guys manage a include file mess ?
Getting rid of that is not straightforard, though some tools can help with that
-
Is it appropiate to comment what a header is needed for?
You can use the tool https://github.com/include-what-you-use/include-what-you-use to do this for for. It tracks included files and can give comment for what is used from each file. It also warns you when you include files that you don’t use
-
Hey Rustaceans! Got a question? Ask here (16/2023)!
Invisible imports (e.g. traits). In Python, everything is fully namespaced (unless you from import * in which case all bets are off). It's always explicit where a name is coming from. C is the opposite: #include lets you refer to anything defined in the headers with no namespacing. That's why a common strategy (include what you use) has an associated code style: after every non-std #include you have a comment saying which of its definitions you are using. Of course, Rust is much less implicit, but I still sometimes struggle with traits. For example, you can use tokio::net::TcpStream, but you need to also use tokio::io::AsyncReadExt for the .read trait to be defined on TcpStream. This makes it hard (for me) to answer questions like "what traits are currently available in this scope?" and "why is this module being imported?"
- I implemented a NASA image compression algorithm
-
IncludeGuardian - improve build times by removing expensive includes
Aside from being closed source and not available on all architectures, how does it compare to iwyu(https://include-what-you-use.org/) or clang's relatively recent include-fixer which is also accessible via clangd?
-
Do you include standard library headers in your implementation file, if they're already been included in the corresponding header file?
I set up include-what-you-use and I let it tell me which headers should be where. The IWYU rules would have put all needed headers including in the cpp file.
STL
-
Show HN: Logfmtxx – Header only C++23 structured logging library using logfmt
Again, they are barely functional.
MSVC chokes on many standard-defined constructs: https://github.com/microsoft/STL/issues/1694
clang does not claim to be "mostly usable" at all - most papers are not implemented: https://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html#cxx20
And gcc will only start ot be usable with CMake when version 14 is released - that has not happened yet.
And, as I mentioned before, IDE support is either buggy (Visual Studio) or non-existing (any other IDE/OS). So you're off to writing in a text editor and hoping your compiler works to a somewhat usable degree. Yes, at some point people should start using modules, I agree, but to advise library maintainers to ship modularized code... the tooling just isn't there yet.
I mean, the GitHub issue is Microsoft trying to ship their standard library modularized, they employ some of the most capable folks on the planet and pay them big money to get that done, while metaphorically sitting next to the Microsoft compiler devs, and they barely, barely get it done (with bugs, as they themselves mention). This is too much for most other library maintainers.
-
Cpp2 and cppfront – An experimental 'C++ syntax 2' and its first compiler
Notice that there are in practice three distinct implementations of the C++ standard library. They're all awful to read though, here's Microsoft's std::vector https://github.com/microsoft/STL/blob/main/stl/inc/vector
However you're being slightly unfair because Rust's Vec is just defined (opaquely) as a RawVec plus a length value, so let's link RawVec, https://doc.rust-lang.org/src/alloc/raw_vec.rs.html -- RawVec is the part responsible for the messy problem of how to actually implement the growable array type.
Still, the existence of three C++ libraries with slightly different (or sometimes hugely different) quality of implementation means good C++ code can't depend on much beyond what the ISO document promises, and yet it must guard against the nonsense inflicted by all three and by lacks of the larger language. In particular everything must use the reserved prefix so that it's not smashed inadvertently by a macro, and lots of weird C++ idioms that preserve performance by sacrificing clarity of implementation are needed, even where you'd ordinarily sacrifice to get the development throughput win of everybody know what's going on. For example you'll see a lot of "pair" types bought into existence which are there to squirrel away a ZST that in C++ can't exist, using the Empty Base Optimisation. In Rust the language has ZSTs so they can just write what they meant.
- C++ Specification vs Implementation
-
C++23: Removing garbage collection support
Here is Microsoft's implementation of map in the standard library. I think of myself as a competent programmer / computer scientist. I couldn't write this: https://github.com/microsoft/STL/blob/f392449fb72d1a387ac502...
-
std::condition_variable wait for (very) long time
Be careful on Windows, the MSVC STL implementation uses the system time, so it can be badly impacted by clock adjustments: https://github.com/microsoft/STL/issues/718
-
Compiler explorer: can you use C++23 std lib modules with MSVC already?
Can you provide a link? If it affects import std;, I'd like to add it to my tracking issue.
- Learn to write production quality STL like classes
-
MSVC C++23 Update
Do you have a list of the bugs you've filed and their current status, like the one I have for the STL? I saw you mentioned 3 bugs 7 months ago, 2 of which were fixed in 17.6 and the third of which was a duplicate of an active bug ("deducing this" is known to not yet work with modules, which is why we don't define the feature-test macro to claim full support).
- C++/CLI wrap of a C++ class that includes <future> in public header
-
Has Boost lost its charm?
Yep. And look at our implementation's name: https://github.com/microsoft/STL
What are some alternatives?
cppinclude - Tool for analyzing includes in C++
EA Standard Template Library - EASTL stands for Electronic Arts Standard Template Library. It is an extensive and robust implementation that has an emphasis on high performance.
coc-clangd - clangd extension for coc.nvim
asio - Boost.org asio module
cpplint - Static code checker for C++
robin-hood-hashing - Fast & memory efficient hashtable based on robin hood hashing for C++11/14/17/20
clangd - clangd language server
tracy - Frame profiler
Cppcheck - static analysis of C/C++ code
gcc
uncrustify - Code beautifier
llvm-project - The LLVM Project is a collection of modular and reusable compiler and toolchain technologies.