Programmer Humor

32464 readers

379 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

cat_programmer@lemmy.ml

1094

Solutions? Where we're going, we don't need solutions. (lemmy.world)

submitted 8 months ago by renzev@lemmy.world to c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml

204 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Please dont take this seriously guys its just a dumb meme I haven't written a single line of code in half of these languages

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] nintendiator@feddit.cl 25 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Problem → return Solution;

C++:

Problem →

const [auto]&& (Problem&& problem) noexcept(noexcept( Solution<Problem>{}(std::forward<Problem>(problem)) )) { return Solution<Problem>{}(std::forward<Problem>(problem)); } -> decltype( Solution<Problem>{}(std::forward<Problem>(problem)) )

[–] xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

return *(solution_t*)&problem;

[–] nintendiator@feddit.cl 5 points 8 months ago

Maximum optimization!

[–] veniasilente@lemm.ee 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But this doesn't return the Solution. You don't invoke the lambda.

(Or does C++ have implied returns now? Last I heard there was implied move)

[–] nintendiator@feddit.cl 2 points 8 months ago

Actually I do; it's the {} that initializes the lambda, and the parenthesis after invokes.

That said, it would have been fun.