Quotes from Bjarne Stroustrup

It's easy to win forgiveness for being wrong; being right is what gets you into real trouble.

If you think it's simple, then you have misunderstood the problem.

Design and programming are human activities; forget that and all is lost.

Proof by analogy is fraud.

C++ is designed to allow you to express ideas, but if you don't have ideas or don't have any clue about how to express them, C++ doesn't offer much help.

The standard library saves programmers from having to reinvent the wheel.

Programming is like sex: It may give some concrete results, but that is not why we do it.

C++ protects against accident, not against fraud.

From one point of view, all that a program ever does is to compute; that is, it takes some inputs and produces some output.

Macro substitution is almost never necessary in C++. Use const (§7.5), constexpr (§2.2.3, §10.4), enum or enum class (§8.4) to define manifest constants, inline (§12.1.5) to avoid function-calling overhead, templates (§3.4, Chapter 23) to specify families of functions and types, and namespaces (§2.4.2, §14.3.1) to avoid name clashes.

Programming is like sex: It may give some concrete results, but that is not why we do it. – apologies to Richard Feynman

The number of errors in code correlates strongly with the amount of code and the complexity of the code.

People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't.

The const specifiers on the functions returning the real and imaginary parts indicate that these functions do not modify the object for which they are called.

You must run before you can walk!

Exitem apenas dois tipos de linguagens: Aquelas que as pessoas reclamam de usar, e aquelas que as pessoas não usam.

C++ offers a small zoo of fundamental types, but since I'm not a zoologist, I will not list them all.

Do not proceed with a mess; messes just grow with time.

Always be suspicious or of course: of course is not a reason.

The fact that 'goto' can do anything is exactly why we don't use it.

Probably, your first reaction is but don't do that, and I agree. However, such code does get written, so it is worth knowing how it is implemented.

Choosing the right precision for a problem where the choice matters requires significant understanding of floating-point computation. If you don't have that understanding, get advice, take the time to learn, or use double and hope for the best.

After all, C++ isn't a perfect match for Java's design aims either.

People who passionately want to believe that the world is basically simple react to this with a fury that goes beyond what I consider appropriate for discussing a programming language.