| ▲ | bregma an hour ago | |||||||
C++ has std::sort() and std::stable_sort(). You should write what you mean, and you should know and understand your tools. Blaming the tool for your ignorance marks you as significantly less than an artisan. | ||||||||
| ▲ | Mond_ 25 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Sort specifically is kind of a weird example, but C++ is full of awful naming. std::map (which is not a hash map, which is what most people would expect), std::move (which doesn't move), std::vector (which is not a vector), and std::vector<bool> (which is not even a std::vector). | ||||||||
| ▲ | tialaramex an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
Sure, both languages offer both generic comparison sorts†. But the defaults matter and as always in C++ the defaults are wrong, here it's reflected in naming. That's not actionable information, except in the sense that the correct action is "don't use C++". Because sure, I know about sort stability, and I know about pointer provenance, and about memory ordering, but there might be any number of things I do not know and unfortunately in C++ "you should know and understand" absolutely everything at all times, which is not viable. † The C++ standard library sorts are both much slower than in Rust, but hey, they're also both less safe so you're really getting the worst of both worlds | ||||||||
| ||||||||