Hello fellows!

I've been trying to help in the beginners forum for a while, and I realized how many times the answer is "read the fucking awesome tutorial you have in this site!" (with more appropriate words, of course ;)).

The truth is the tutorial is amazing, the explanations could't be better, and it would save a lot of time for those who ask the simplest question in the forum and waits for an answer, if they know it exist. It would even save them money paying for stupid courses, when you really have EVERYTHING explained here! (Feels like kind of open-course, doesn't it? xD)

I came to this site *because* of this tutorial, and then I hadn't this problem, but sincerely, I think it's far too hidden (or at least not enough publicized...) I think a tutorial like this deserves a great shiny fancy banner, every newbie would click at.

Ok, perhaps not that shiny, but at least something big that says TUTORIAL, finding the balance between seriousness and noob-friendliness...

what do you think?

I can see a point to this. At least, instead of "hiding" it under Documentation, just make it another link under C++.

Oh wow, I didn't know where it was located actually. I always just went to google and searched for it that way

On a related note: wasn't there an expanded FAQ created a while ago? Anyone know where that is located?

I think that it is still work in-progress

http://www.cplusplus.com/faq/

http://www.cplusplus.com/faq/ (still in development)

By "work in progress", I take it you mean "work that was off to a great start and then died silently", or is someone still working on it?

It has some very good parts already, which is why it confuses me that it apparently can't be reached unless you know the url.

"work that was off to a great start and then died silently"... or died due to lack of senior member support. It is a lot of work for one person.

The tutorial and the FAQ are two totally-different things.

The FAQ is stalled because my PC died -- both (that's right, both) hard drives crashed at the same time, and I'm still trying to get a development PC back together. Right now I'm using my kid's PC.

It won't be too much longer before I can get the FAQ moving again -- I've nearly got things together enough to start.

I don't know more than that, but I think that twicker's focus is on the Documentation on the site first, and then revision of the tutorial after that.

If you need any help with the FAQ, I'd love to help out

I too will be happy to continue writing articles when your computer situation improves. :)

-Albatross

So Duoas can access a hidden part of this site? What else can he access? And who else can, besides the admin?

Er, yes, I have rights to modify the new FAQ portion of the site -- which is, as yet, unpublished. But only for that purpose and because I was asked to.

See http://cplusplus.com/forum/lounge/60389/

Once the new FAQ is approved and integrated into the main site I will no longer have that kind of access. Who else has that kind of access is none of my business, nor, to be blunt, anyone else's. I'm sorry I let it slip. (I thought it was common knowledge.)

If you want to help, please take the time to review the work already done and to keep tabs on the above-linked thread for suggestions and feedback.

The new FAQ section itself can be found at http://cplusplus.com/faq/ , but remember it is a work in progress and far from complete.

If you want to help, please take the time to review the work already done and to keep tabs on the above-linked thread for suggestions and feedback.

Why was that thread allowed to be archived instead of being stickie'd?

The FAQ itself seems to be of good quality; page layout and graphics look great.
At this point all I can criticize is the awkward enthusiasm oozin' out of some parts, including some example code. Then again, I recognize it's a matter of style, which is adapted to how formal vs friendly you want the FAQ to be.

Hmm, didn't realize it got archived...

Point out the excessive enthusiasm and I'll try to fix it. :-J

The current C++11 standard is very well designed, and many compilers are quickly moving towards full compliance.

Well I'm not saying it isn't, it might. But without a link to Compiler Compliance, that paragraph is useless.

What is Boost? And why do I want it? You are not mistaken. We think you should spend some time installing the Boost Libraries in addition to your standard C++ setup.

"We".

As for the source, I had the "Jennifer O'Keefe" example in mind, but then realized I was malfunctioning.
And I think I saw a stray "Yay!" somewhere.

Well I'm not saying it isn't, it might. But without a link to Compiler Compliance, that paragraph is useless.

This isn't wikipedia. There is no one source for that statement -- you have to look at individual compiler's development team statements about their efforts towards compliance.

You should notice, however, after the extensive examples testing for support for key C++11 features, I did provide two very important links to C++11 support pages: one from the US government itself that tests compiler compliance, and another from the Apache Software Foundation, who has always had a strong presence and interest in compiler compliance issues.

"We".

Yes. By "we", I mean C++ professionals all over the globe, in addition to the maintainers of this site, in addition to JTC1/SC22/WG21, who develop and maintain C++ through Boost.

Individual members of the forum are not indicated. (Nor should they be.)

"Jennifer O'Keefe"

Suggest a different name. Or a different example. My Google's top result is a photographer in California, and I see nothing pornographic or egregiously inappropriate in the following pages, nor in images with safe search turned off.

If you think it is an issue, show me why and/or suggest something different.

"Yay!"

Found it at http://cplusplus.com/faq/sequences/sequencing/sort-algorithms/#bubble-sort

Why is it a problem? Should I use another word, like "hurrah"? Or do you think it is too unformal?

Thanks for your time!

If you think it is an issue, show me why and/or suggest something different.

At the time I wasn't fully lucid. So I thought there was something wrong with the Jennifer example, not the name. Which is why I worded my previous post the way I did.

Why is it a problem? Should I use another word, like "hurrah"? Or do you think it is too unformal?

You mean "informal"? A bit, yes. But I never said it's a problem. At worst, it's just style artifact, which I didn't expect.

Yes. By "we", I mean C++ professionals all over the globe, in addition to the maintainers of this site, in addition to JTC1/SC22/WG21, who develop and maintain C++ through Boost.

A short list of names would sound more convincing than "we".

Individual members of the forum are not indicated. (Nor should they be.)

Why not?

A short list of names would sound more convincing than "we".

I don't see how adding names actually contributes anything. Looks like a simple segue into the meat of the faq, which wouldn't be served by listing names the readers of the faq are unlikely to know or care about.

Why not?

Because it would then put a flag on their head so instead of posting to the forums, most users would PM the people from the FAQs and such and harass them to get help. I've seen it happen on other sites, but at least this one allows you to turn off your PMs if need be.