flying_gel

It makes perfect sense actually. I did write another comment here if you are interested.

This is how operator overloads were written going back to the initial version of C++ back in 1985. The only new thing is that we can now add = default to get the compiler to generate a default implementation that compares all the member variables for you.

Maybe to a non C++ dev, but a lot of C++ is probably incomprehensible to a non C++ dev, just like there are other laguages that are incomprehensible to C++ devs. To me it makes perfect sense as it works just like all the other operator overloads.

auto - let the compiler deduce return type

operator<=> - override the spaceship operator (pretty sure it exists in python too)

(const ClassName&) - compare this class, presumably defined in Class name, with a const reference of type Class name, i.e. its own type.

const - comparison can be made for const objects

= default; - Use the default implementation, which is comparing all the member variables.

An alternate more explicit version, which is actually what people recommend:

auto operator<=>(const ClassName&, const ClassName&) = default;

if I just want to have less than comparison for example I would:

This one makes it explicit that you're comparing two Class name objects.

if I just want to have less than comparison for example I would:

auto operator<(const ClassName&, const ClassName&) = default;

If I need to compare against another class I could define: auto operator<(const ClassName&, const OtherClass&)

You mean copy/move constructor and assignment operator?

Unless you have any special handling the ones generated by the compiler automatically should work just fine. But if you do have to define them for some reason (which is becoming increasingly rare) you would need to define both if you need both copy/move construction and copy/move assignment.

I do appreciate how newer C++ standards have made these kinds of things a lot easier too.

Define all comparison operators with just one one line using C++20

auto operator<=>(const ClassName&) const = default;

Tens of billions is technically correct since in the last year US spent about 2 tens of billions, I.e. $20 billion, or about 2.5% of the annual military budget on Israel.

Could also be the first women president vs 4th worst president of all time.

edit: actually shared 3rd worst, shares with Franklin Pierce

While still to the right of center of the political compass, I do really like how much closer to the center Walz is than the other and previous candidates.

Not to defend them too much and I have to admit that I don't know much about the details which bills were priorities during the 4 months that Obama has house, senate and Presidency.

What I did read a while back was that Obama didn't know how long his supermajority would last and some of the things he wanted he wanted done but couldn't once he lost the house.

I agree that Palestine is an important issue, do you have any suggestions on how to improve the situation?

USA is a very pro Israel county and the further right you get the more pro-israel you get.

Once both Democrats and Republicans are right wing parties it's not news to anyone that they support Israel.

Edit: If you are pro-palestine, I suggest you vote as far left as you can (which at the moment realistically only is Democrats) and contact your congressman/women to let them know what your views on these issues are.

These are only damning comments if you have the views that Biden's presidency had been a disaster. So of course Republicans and their news would write negative articles and a Democratic news source would show it as Harris having worked with Biden to get things done.

Nothing to see here really, all Biden said I'd say that they work together for a common goal.

Isn't politics all about coming together, making compromises and try to agree what's best for the country?

For those who attack Fox news as a source they have a point, you won't get factual news from there, it will be very skewed to the right and they will make a story out of nothing for clicks.

The 1960s had political engagement and division, no one's denying that.

However it was surpassed in 2020 which was a record year for turnout of 66.8% of eligible voters. Specifically, 90.6% of eligible women were registered, and about 68.4% of them actually voted. Women outpaced men in both categories. Young voters, especially young women, were a big part of that surge.

Trump lost big then, imagine now with all the news about record registrations how much he might lose by now. Personally I think it would be very funny to see Harris break 100M votes,. Can you imagine how angry Trump would be :)