But wouldn't one be required to include a particular header in such case (i.e. the correct header for defining a particular type)?
I mean, no typedef names are defined in the global scope without including any headers right? Like I find it really weird that a type ending in _t would be UB if there is no such typedef name declared at all.
Or is this UB stuff merely a way for the ISO C committee to enforce this without having to define <something more complicated>?
I have worked as a C++ dev, but am definitely not a C++ expert by any means.
My take however is that C++ is inherently a complex language due to deliberately not sacrificing backwards-compatability of the syntax and semantics, which has been creating a mess as the language has evolved: there are many, many things to define semantically in order to "fit" a new piece in this old already-elaborate puzzle that is the C++ standard.
But why do they need this from public school over say any other social ... activity (?). For example sports.
I am genuinely questioning whether public school makes children socially mature rather than only being a traumatic experience for many pupils, for no other reason than that public schooling is the default choice.
- Difficult transition to the cliques and more aggressive social dynamics of public school
Am I naive in thinking that the aggressive social dynamics of public school adds no value whatsoever to a child's or teenager's development?
Like, _why_ would anyone want to put their children through that? Is it _really_ integral to a person's social development to understand how to interact with bullies (worst case)?
I admit that I am rather nihilistic about public schooling, but I'm open to changing my mind.