single_file_libs VS CppCoreGuidelines

Yep: https://github.com/nothings/single_file_libs

Also sometimes I use only header (.h) with all functions included wrapped by #ifndef and #endif. When I use these? for code that I always reuse to simplify things and some data stucture handling (to implement dynamic arrays). A good example list of these (not mine) are https://github.com/nothings/single_file_libs

Also, there are many libraries that are much bigger (little list I found) but are implemented in a single header file.

If others have a similiar problem, I found a great github page that has lots of single header libraries, including data structures.

> Like, why don't we just let projects be "done"? Things don't need to be maintained and updated for eternity.

This is generally why I opt for "single-file" libraries that do one simple task well. The smaller the library, the more likely it is "done". For example, do I want some insanely complex image library that handles every file format under the sun, or do I just want some basic one that allows me to output a simple JPEG?

I often find myself referring to "single_file_libs" repository: https://github.com/nothings/single_file_libs

Looking at the open issues, it doesn't appear to be actively maintained but it's still an incredibly good resource for "completed" projects.

Steamworks is the easy option, but if you're programming-savvy you could also use a networking library (some lists for C and C++: 1 2 3) to accomplish the same thing.

Have a look at these. https://github.com/nothings/single_file_libs#geometry-file

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.