Uh oh. If you’re visiting this page, you may have found something wrong with the site.
That’s okay. Let us know and we’ll try to fix it!
- If you found something wrong with a particular tutorial of the site (e.g. a typo or incorrect example), just leave a comment on that tutorial.
- If you found something wrong with the site in general (e.g. broken functionality, the layout), please leave a comment below.
- If all else fails, use the contact form in the About/Contact section.
Thanks for helping to make the site better for everyone.
The ads are behaving really weird lately (the issue persists for at least an hour, I can't say more precisely). They are loading normally with the page and then just disappear all together (happens on all the pages). It's the case in Chromium, Brave and Firefox on my laptop and seems to be the same in the mobile version as well (Chrome and Brave browsers).
On the other web-sites Google ads are working normally.
Maybe it's something temporary, but I thought I should mention it in case there's a problem with the site.
This issue is back again for me. Until recently it seemed to be back to normal.
Is it only me? Can anybody check whether the ads are loading normally for them?
@nascardriver? (sorry to bother you, but you may read it before it's gone again)
Can't reproduce
chromium 76.0.3809.100
firefox 70.0b5
Next time you experience this, open the developer console (ctrl+shift+i) and see if there's anything suspicious.
Thanks for checking it out. I'm still having this problem, only on learncpp.com, all of a sudden. Everything's alright on other web-sites (I used Android Police as a test subject - it has lot's of google banners). I checked in multiple browsers, it's all the same...
I don't see anything suspicious in the console output (I just don't know what to look for), but it says `style="display: none;"` in all google related lines. Should it be like that?
Opening the dev.console in Brave browser gives a warning: "The resource https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/r20190910/r20190131/show_ads_impl.js was preloaded using link preload but not used within a few seconds from the window's load event. Please make sure it has an appropriate `as` value and it is preloaded intentionally."
*sorry, for some reason I can't edit my previous message.
edit: editing thing reappeared. So, in order not to spam messages, editing this one.
edit2: and an error:
"Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 404 ()
https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/r20190910/null/reactive_library_fy2019.js?cache=bust"
I'm okay with that if I'm only one concerned, but just in case it's something needed to be fixed.
It sounds like maybe the anti-spam filter on the ads scooped up your IP. I just checked the blacklist though and I don't see your IP on it. Are you still experiencing the issue?
Nope, only those 2 episodes (each was lasting for several hours). After nascardriver said that everything's working well on his side I changed my DNS to Google's and cleared my local js cache. Since then it seems to be normal again.
Untill somebody else complains about a similar issue, I think it can be considered something on my side.
Also, can you please move all this to the "Report an Issue" section? I noticed too late that I could (should) have written there instead (typical for me, sorry). It will be easier for others to see it, if someone else experiences this problem.
Hi @Alex!
On the site index, under Strings, C-style, one subtopic is listed as "sumbolic constants". Gave me a good chuckle, but should better be fixed ;)
Heh. Thanks for pointing that out! Fixed.
So, am i supposed to read the chapters in the order they're displayed? Because there are chapters named 'O' and 'S' and they used to be other chapters, so i'm getting a little confused here.
Thanks in advance.
Hi!
Yep, read them in the order they're displayed in. Chapter 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 -> O -> S -> 5 -> ...
Thanks dude! Loving the site so far!
Hi Alex! Is it possible to enable markdown formatting in comments (via some WordPress plugin)? Currently we can't make some text inline monospace. Sometimes I want to say `std::string` to make the class name stand out, but if I try to do the [ code ] (without the spaces) thing, the text in between the two tags are placed in its own paragraph. Italics and links lists (ordered and unordered) and such would also be nice ;-)
It's possible, but unfortunately I don't have much time to look into it at the moment. :( I'll put it on my to-do.
I don't know if I am asking at the right place, but is it maybe possible to get an easier way to move to the next and previous page? Like an arrows on the left and the right of the screen. Currently, you have to scroll to the spot just below the tutorial and above the comments to get links to the next/previous lesson. Would make searching for something you read, but can't remember exactly where, a lot easier.
This may be possible to do for the lessons that have been updated (the lesson linkages are now automatic, whereas before they were all hand-constructed). Let me look into this.
There are multiple
in the source of https://www.learncpp.com/. Can you make the names unique so I can bookmark with, for example, https://www.learncpp.com/#Chapter2 (there are two "#Chapter2", one for chapter 2 and one for chapter D).
Since I'm already here, what does "Split" mean in the table of contents (second column of table at https://www.learncpp.com/)?
Another user asked the question here:
https://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/variable-assignment-and-initialization/#comment-398359
Anchor links updated as requested.
"Split" means the original lesson was split into 2 or more lessons because it was getting too long. Content that used to be in the split lesson may now be in the subsequent lesson instead.
Hello Alex,
First, I want to thank you for putting this tutorial together and maintaining it! I am enjoying going this and learning.
I found a misspelled word on this page: https://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/finding-issues-before-they-become-problems/comment-page-1/#comment-399019
Section "An introduction to constraints" first word of the first sentence is missing an "s" in "Contraint-based".
Thank you again for making this available!
Mike
Thanks, the typo has been fixed.
The instructions seem to encourage the use of this form over the About/Contact form. I leave my questions here about translations, a topic I did not find addressed under "older comments".
Would you want people to translate the content here? What would be the relevant copyright concerns, if any? If people do translate your material, would you wish for the product to be somehow integrated into this site? (I assume this would be a better option for your site traffic than a simple reference to this site)
As of yet, due to the daunting amount of material to cover, I've not actual plans to do the translation. Additionally, I don't think one person can manage this alone. Assuming crowd effort at translation isn't possible on your site, perhaps one could use free mediawiki sites as an interim solution to promote hobbyists participation. In any event, I wanted to see if there are any suggestions about this. More generally, I wanted to understand the relevant preferences and policies of this site.
I've tried several methods of providing translations in the past, including having translators work on this site. In no case has the outcome been satisfactory. The amount of content is huge, and even worse, it's continually evolving, meaning translations get out of date.
At this point, I'm focused on doing an update pass on this site to incorporate new material and updated best practices, and not accepting any translation requests.
can we get this tutorial in pdf format ?
No one will forbid you to make it yourself. However, the creators of this tutorial rely on ads to finance the operation of the website and, as far as I know, will not provide a .pdf of the tutorials themselves.
Good day to you, Alex.
At first, I would like to thank you for the awesome tutorials. Now, I would like to ask (and this maybe a stupid question) what happened to the chapter names and do you plan on revising them to the pre-crash situation? For example, before the server crash there was chapter 1.4 - function return values and 1.4a - function parameters and arguments. Now, the chapter numbering has been changed and chapter order has been "messed up". I say messed up because I was following the tutorials and writing/trying the code examples based on the old numbering scheme.
The old chapter 1 was split into 3 chapters (now chapters 1-3). The content was also re-sorted into an order that I think offers a bit more of a gentle introduction to topics. Much of the existing content was extended to add additional examples, best practices, and warnings.
There is no plan to return to the prior numbering (it wouldn't make sense).
If I were you, I'd just restart from the beginning of chapter 1 -- the stuff you already know, you'll blow through quickly. But you'll inevitably encounter some new stuff of value in the topics you've already covered, and you'll also pick up the new material this way.
Makes sense. Though, now it's a PIA to rewrite everything, haha. I was trying to learn how to use cmake as well in the same process.
This is a hobby which I find rather interesting but have yet to make any significant advances.
BTW, since I mentioned it anyway - do you recommend I stick to cmake, switch to meson, or try to understand both? I'm using cmake in order to eliminate the need for an IDE (got tired of them). It was a bumpy learning experience. And I recently heard about meson while trying to fix some broken "things" with my Ubuntu.
I hate makefiles so I'm the wrong person to ask. :) Maybe Nascardriver has an opinion.
Didn't expect that, haha. If you don't mind me asking, why do you hate makefiles?
P.S.
Thank you for the assistance.
Hi Nikola!
When using CMake, one doesn't have to worry about makefiles, as they're generated automatically, Alex must have a secret other reason or he used make without CMake.
I've never used Meson, so I can't tell you which one is better. From the looks of it, it appears to be very similar to CMake. If you already know one or the other, I don't think there's a reason to switch, unless you want to know both of course.
The creators of Meson argue that CMake's language is cumbersome. I'm not a fan of CMake's language, but it's easy to use once you've got the hang of it. You're not going to spend a lot of time configuring it anyway.
Meson might be faster than CMake, I don't know that. However, as long as you're not writing a huge project, re-compilation is fast enough with CMake. You're going to need some time for a full compilation with both.
If you don't use CMake or Meson yet, go ahead and learn Meson, it sounds all right, but probably has more bugs than CMake, as it's rather new.
Well, whatever is Alex's reason for hating them, I'll stick to Cmake and makefiles :D
Gedit and its "cobalt" theme with syntax highlighting is pretty much all that I need.
Meson - maybe later, based on your explanation. Don't know if it is worth it for me considering this is just a hobby and that I'm rather bad at it altogether. I doubt I'll ever do any big project (or anything relevant) when it comes to programming, but it doesn't hurt to know.
Thank you both for your replies and keep up the good work. All the best for you.