Zoomer C++

Last time, we took a trip down memory lane with Boomer C: a love letter (or maybe a restraining order) to the world of raw pointers, mysterious `#defines`, and codebases held together with duct tape and undefined behavior. But time marches on, and so do our programming paradigms. So today we turn our gaze to the other end of the timeline: Zoomer C++. This is the world where every function is a lambda, every list is a view, and your compile errors are longer than your resume. If Boomer C was inscrutable because it lacked structure, Zoomer C++ is inscrutable because it has too much. Buckle up.

The Future Is Generic, And So Is the Error Message

Welcome to the brave new world of Zoomer C++, where everything is a lambda, your for-loops have become incomprehensible ranges pipelines, and trying to understand a type error requires a six-month sabbatical and a bottle of whiskey. If Boomer C was all about pointer arithmetic and compile-time segfaults, Zoomer C++ is its ADHD-afflicted descendant: slick, modern, theoretically safe, and completely illegible.

What's Wrong With This Perfectly Good for Loop?

```

for (auto& thing : container) {

    doStuff(thing);

}

```

Get this trash out of here. Real Zoomer C++ devs know that if you’re not piping things through three layers of std::views::transform, std::views::filter, and then slapping a .begin() at the end to trigger instantiation of 500 lines of template goo, you’re living in the past.

```

auto pipeline = container 

              | std::views::filter([](const auto& x) { return x.valid(); })

              | std::views::transform([](const auto& x) { return x.processed(); });

for (auto&& thing : pipeline) {

    handle(thing);

}

```

Wow, so elegant. So expressive. So unreadable to anyone who didn’t just watch a CppCon talk on this exact pattern.

Lambdas Are the New Gotos

In Zoomer C++, every piece of logic is now a lambda. Business logic? Lambda. Predicate? Lambda. Callback? Lambda. Entire function? You guessed it—lambda passed into another lambda.

```

auto doImportantStuff = [](auto&& f) {

    return [=](auto&& x) {

        return f(x + 42);

    };

};

```

Why write clear, reusable functions when you can inline your anonymous function inside your monadic combinator inside your coroutine? Bonus points if you move-capture a shared_ptr by value and forget you're in a loop.

“Concepts” – For When Your Types Were Too Understandable

The old C++ template errors were bad, sure. But at least they were honest. Zoomer C++ gives you concepts, a whole new way to write 10 lines of semantic constraints just to express that the argument is “vector-like” and “printable-ish”.

```

template<typename T>

concept PrintableContainer = requires(T t) {

    { std::cout << *t.begin() };

};

```

Now you can spend your time debugging why your perfectly valid `std::list<std::optional<std::string>>` doesn't satisfy your `ReadableForwardFlushableIterableConcept` instead of just fixing the code.

Metaprogramming: Still a Bad Idea, Now With constexpr

Everything is `constexpr` now. Your loop? `constexpr`. Your lookup table? `constexpr`. Your feelings about this? Probably `constexpr`, too.

```

constexpr auto table = []() {

    std::array<int, 256> arr{};

    for (int i = 0; i < 256; ++i) arr[i] = someMagic(i);

    return arr;

}();

```

Yes, you can now compute a DFA at compile time. Should you? No. Will someone on GitHub call you a coward if you don’t? Absolutely.

Smart Pointers, Smart Everything

Gone are the days of `malloc` and `free`. Zoomer C++ is all about `std::unique_ptr`, `std::shared_ptr`, and `std::weak_ptr` (because you need a master's degree in ownership semantics just to pass an object to a function).

And remember, you’re not a real modern C++ dev unless you:

• `emplace_back` everything.

• Use `auto` even when it actively hurts readability.

• Never write a `delete` because RAII will obviously just take care of it.

• Panic if someone uses `new`

Conclusion

Zoomer C++ is a "beautiful" Frankenstein’s monster—stitched together from lambda calculus, compile-time turing machines, and conference slides. It promises safety, performance, and clarity. What it delivers is type-checking as performance art and code that reads like a failed academic paper.

But hey, at least there’s no undefined behavior… probably.