>>105987059
>manually rewriting functions/methods
Use an IDE that does it automatically, tard
>Manually add files to CMake
Same
>Manually manage your resources
More control is a benefit not a drawback. ie: You get the opportunity to finely control how your application functions from a memory perspective
>pitfalls in...
Such as?
>Write 5 different ctors for each class
You're doing it wrong if you're doing this. Now we know it's a skill issue.
>Every major update makes previous idioms old and obsolete
Only happens for the really major updates that are released decades apart. C++98 vs C++11 vs C++20. The old idioms are still fine - the new stuff is syntactic sugar on top of them.
>Manually write scripts to... dependencies...
Build tools are not a part of the language.
>No testing framework
I've used at least 3 different ones in my decade long career so far
>Resource leakage
lol, only if you're a shit coder. And why would you have to "rewrite" to fix bugs like that? Because your design was fundamentally broken in the first place? And wtf is that about "destructors not being invoked because of an exception". That's like the whole point of destructors.
>smart pointers
"hyper modern" LMAO
>docgen
Uh, these exist as well...?
>stdlib doesn't have X, so you need an additional library
Ok...?
>template tricks
Such as?
>12 hour compile time
You did something wrong
>Pages of STL error messages
Ok this is annoying. One valid complaint. Although in practice it's fine because you only need to read the first error anyways, and your IDE can redirect you right to that. So in practice, not actually an issue.
