[...]Session Topics: Error Resilience in C++11 « C++ and Beyond[...]…

I am also glad that the german book “C++11 programmieren” at least
mentions some of your early items — http://cpp11.generisch.de/effective-c11-scotts-erste-ideen/

That is of not the least because I had your
great C++11 slides at hand to guide me…

‘using’ could perhaps be a candidate?

/Kleist

For example:
given the code: std::vector v = foo();
These keystrokes: [v][.][b][down-arrow][enter][(][)]
Results in this code: v.begin()

If there is a compelling reason to prefer non-member begin/end to member versions, I hope your talk can also convince someone at Microsoft to make it just as easy to use the non-member begin/end as it is to use the member versions now. No matter how good a guideline is, if it is hard to follow it often won’t be followed.

I do see the advantage where the type of the container may change to one that does not have the member versions (template code and the like), but that is not the type of code I usually write. Also, assuming I’m using C++11 and following your other guideline, std::array does have member .begin() and .end(), (and I avoid the non-standard Microsoft containers even though I use Visual Studio).

I look forward to hearing more about this proposed guideline, as well as the others.

CS

All the improvements, cool features, etc. are meaningless if you can’t apply them in your daily work. When your organization resists adopting C++ (or some aspects of it), you’ve got an uphill battle on your hands.

You three guys are extremely sharp technically, but it’s nice to see you also address some of the “real world” issues that are often even more important (or at least often overlooked).