Talk:cpp/language

Hundreds of references to c++11 and nothing about what it is. why?71.31.147.72 13:56, 16 December 2011 (PST)

interesting point, perhaps there needs to be a cpp/language/history Meanwhile, enwiki:C++11 Cubbi 15:51, 16 December 2011 (PST)

Sections

Splitting the page into sections (like the beginning few links) might be a bit better for consistency's sake. We could also go into a bit more detail about the individual sections and why they're important. For example, we'd have a page on flow control, one on functions, one on types/variables, etc. --- Undeterminant 12:10, 26 February 2012 (PST)

I agree that this page is getting a little long, but I'm not sure that it's an obvious candidate to be broken up into subsections. If there are arguments for making it much longer, I think breaking it into subsections would be useful. For the current length, I wonder if having a table of contents at the top with anchor links to the different sections would help? Nate 13:20, 26 February 2012 (PST)

I'd be a little cautious about the moving the subsections into different pages. This page in its current form serves very well as an index of all language-related content we have. The first few sections are there probably because there wasn't any obvious way to categorize them. Having said that, I think that there are other options. For example, the detailed explanation could live in a separated page. There's one thing to note however. If you want to put general information about flow control or other subject, the regular Wikipedia or Wikibooks might be a better choice. They most probably already have a high quality article on the subject. Why not put a link to their resources instead of trying to invent our own? After all, the wiki systems are almost the same. -P12 16:03, 26 February 2012 (PST)

For going into detailed explanations, should we break down sections more like the standard (Basic Concepts, Standard Conversions, Expressions, Statements, ...) or in a more tutorial format (basic statements, flow control, data types, ...). Doing so would make things easier from an authoring perspective, as the question of: Is a section for this written yet? is easy to answer. On the other hand, breaking down in more of a tutorial format makes it easier on readers. I'm not sure it is a *big deal*, since the standard is not laid out much differently than how I would lay out a tutorial. --tgockel 11:52, 6 March 2012 (MST)

i can't found discussion page or create it !!

hi guys !

i have a problem in discussion page in Arabic language , my problem is i can't add topic in the discussion page , and i get the following error :

the input is the same in the black page ( i try to translate the error from Arabic) *[^\x00-\x7F].* #Non ascii usernames/articles are not allowed

Hi. I've fixed the problem with discussion pages. -- P12 04:05, 21 April 2012 (PDT)

Declaration or declarations?

I get a feeling that we should use singular for descriptions of declarations. The page lists components of the C++ syntax, so function declaration already encompasses all ways to declare a function. Function declarations, on the other hand, seems to imply that there are at least two entirely different ways to declare a function. Using singular would also be consistent with other usage on the page, for example specifiers, special member functions, operators, etc. -- P12 10:39, 9 May 2012 (PDT)

FWIW, the standard uses plurals: "8.3.5 Functions [dcl.fct]" and "8.4 Function definitions [dcl.fct.def]" --Cubbi 10:51, 9 May 2012 (PDT)

There is also a smallish matter of presentation. It seems (a little) difficult to read a bullet item like:

• function declaration declares a function

...because the words run together. Not a lot, but it looks a little awkward, right? It looked like a lot of the bullets tried to take the form of sentence fragments, like:

• if executes code conditionally

...which seems a little easier to parse. In that vein, these are also a little more sentence-y:

• function declarations declare functions
• a function declaration declares a function

Alternatively, a delimiter might also make this a little clearer:

• function declaration - declare a function

Lots of options...--Nate 12:10, 9 May 2012 (PDT)

Umm, okay. I'm not native English speaker so I can't decide what's better anyway. Maybe the best option is just leave as is. This is insignificant issue, it's probably good idea not waste time on it. -- P12 14:23, 10 May 2012 (PDT)