Consider the function Message::acceptableBoundary(). That function's reading order is exactly the same as the its execution order. This is not unusual in C and C++ (and more or less in Java), but there is a significant exception, for(). Here's an example where the execution order is not the same as the reading order:

int i; for( i = 42¹; i < 69²; i++⁵ ) { foo( i );³ bar( x[i] );⁴ }

The brain is really good at detecting rules from patterns or almost-patterns, so I think using for() is tempting fate. Much better to rewrite and spend one more line and three more printable characters:

int i = 42;¹ while( i < 69² ) { foo( i );³ bar( x[i] );⁴ i++;⁵ ) }

The pedantic reader will now mutter about *p++ = *q++; and be right. That saving is also not worth it. Use the three-character workaround. Ditto function arguments with side effects.

Finally there's a C++ compiler that makes a reasonable attempt at emitting helpful error messages.

Bjarne Stroustrup may have sins to answer for, (more…)

Exceptions are such a pain. They look as if someone thought they could solve many disparate problems with one tool, and in the end, the tool doesn't look terribly elegant, and people don't use it terribly well. (more…)