The back cover of C++: The Language raises questions not answered by front cover
70 points by paulmooreparks 4 hours ago | 13 comments

seanhunter 2 hours ago
It reminds me of an incident involving an old colleague of mine at some kind of graduate recruitment fair thing. He walked past a stand which was trying to hire engineers which had some code on the wall when the following exchange happened:

   Recruiter: Hey there! <indicates the code> Do you know what this is?
   Colleague: Err, <looks…thinks for a bit>… It *looks* like some sort of network protocol
   Recruiter: <smug> No, it’s *COMPUTER CODE*
reply
bad_username 2 hours ago
I wish <smug></smug> was a real HTML tag
reply
kstrauser 60 minutes ago
It's a semantic div tag, and it's spelled "<actually>".
reply
20k 2 hours ago
Its crazy to me how little effort publishers put into the basic parts of their job sometimes. Its even funnier that raymond chen of all people is the one calling this out
reply
defrost 2 hours ago
On the matter of book back text, The Profit by Kehlog Albran has a rear blurb that likens the style of the author to that of a man with a much larger brain.
reply
Bolwin 2 hours ago
Also is this an official Microsoft dev blog?

Probably not a good look back at publishing hq

reply
taneq 20 minutes ago
This post discusses the topic and makes several key observations.
reply
koolala 2 hours ago
At least the JavaScript image is excusable since most implementations are made in C++.
reply
pjmlp 23 minutes ago
And some of us expect that candidates have at least read the C++ addons documentation chapter.
reply
block_dagger 2 hours ago
A clear case of human slop.
reply
hmry 4 minutes ago
This 9 year old publisher still slops the old-fashioned way
reply
gruntled-worker 2 hours ago
auto get_xyz_position() -> std::unordered_map<std::string, double *> { ... }
reply
hmry 2 hours ago
You'll need to elaborate
reply