HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
isocpp
CppCoreGuidelines
CSS2015–2026
isocpp / CppCoreGuidelines

CppCoreGuidelines

The C++ Core Guidelines are a set of tried-and-true guidelines, rules, and best practices about coding in C++

85Distinct people
100Mentions
1Explicit recommenders
45.5KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

The C++ Core Guidelines are a set of tried-and-true guidelines, rules, and best practices about coding in C++

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

Once you've become familiar with the basics of the language, I highly recommend taking a look at C++ Core Guidelines https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines

filereaper used a recommendation phrase. One indexed comment matches. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 6:01:08 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year100 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2015-09-16 08:12:12 UTC to 2026-01-26 15:51:17 UTC.

051015202015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 21 mentions; 11 submissions, 10 comments20152016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 20 mentions; 2 submissions, 18 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 12 mentions; 0 submissions, 12 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 16 mentions; 3 submissions, 13 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 0 submissions, 6 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 10 mentions; 1 submissions, 9 comments20202021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 0 submissions, 5 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC211110
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC20218
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC12012
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC16313
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC606
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC1019
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC505
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC110

From the project README

An excerpt from the repository, fetched Nov 12, 2026.

Read the project’s introduction
"Within C++ is a smaller, simpler, safer language struggling to get out." -- Bjarne Stroustrup The C++ Core Guidelines are a collaborative effort led by Bjarne Stroustrup, much like the C++ language itself. They are the result of many person-years of discussion and design across a number of organizations. Their design encourages general applicability and broad adoption but they can be freely copied and modified to meet your organization's needs. Getting started The guidelines themselves are found at CppCoreGuidelines. The document is in GH-flavored MarkDown. It is intentionally kept simple, mostly in ASCII, to allow automatic post-processing such as language translation and reformatting. The editors maintain one version formatted for browsing. Note that it is manually integrated and can be slightly older than the version in the master branch. The Guidelines are a constantly evolving document without a strict "release" cadence. Bjarne Stroustrup periodically reviews the document and increments the version number in the introduction. Checkins that increment the version number are tagged in git. Many of the guidelines make use of the header-only Guidelines Support Library. One implementation is available at GSL: Guidelines Support Library. Background and scope The aim of the guidelines is to help people to use modern C++ effectively. By "modern C++" we mean C++11 and newer. In other words, what would you like your code to look like in 5 years' time, given that you can start now? In 10 years' time? The guidelines are focused on relatively higher-level issues, such as interfaces, resource management, memory management, and concurrency. Such rules affect application architecture and library design. Following the rules will lead to code that is statically type-safe, has no resource leaks, and catches many more programming logic errors than is common in code today. And it will run fast -- you can afford to do things right. We are less concerned with low-level issues, such as naming conventions and indentation style. However, no topic that can help a programmer is out of bounds. Our initial set of rules emphasizes safety (of various forms) and simplicity. They may very well be too strict. We expect to have to introduce more exceptions to better accommodate real-world needs. We also need more rules. You will find some of the rules contrary to your expectations or even contrary to your experience. If we haven't suggested that you change your coding style in any way, we have failed! Please try to verify or disprove rules! In particular, we'd really like to have some of our rules backed up with measurements or better examples. You will find some of the rules obvious or even trivial. Please remember that one purpose of a guideline is to help someone who is less experienced or coming from a different background or language to get up to speed. The rules are designed to be supported by an analysis tool. Violations of rules will be flagged with references (or links) to the relevant rule. We do not expect you to memorize all the rules before trying to write code. The rules are meant for gradual introduction into a code base. We plan to build tools for that and hope others will too. Contributions and LICENSE Comments and suggestions for improvements are most welcome. We plan to modify and extend this document as our understanding improves and the language and the set of available libraries improve. More details are found at CONTRIBUTING and LICENSE. Thanks to DigitalOcean for hosting the Standard C++ Foundation website.
Read the full README on GitHub

What Hacker News says

21 sources
I think this is a fundamental problem with C. Both of the language itself, but also of the C programming culture of insisting on very low levels of abstractions. Bugs and undefined behaviour is too easy for programmers to write when the level of abstraction is low. Too much boilerplate to get wrong. But too low a level is also bad for an optimizer. It cant assume it understand the programmers intention with the code. C++ tries to fix some of this by creating a higher level language and library on top of C. Low level code is considered unsafe, when higher level abstractions can be used as replacements. Some examples of replacing low level with high level. Raw (owning) pointers and manual memory management are replaced with RAII value semantics and occasionally smart pointers. Raw loops are replaced by container iteration and better yet by
Read the rest
STL algorithms. Casts are replaced by templates. Threads and mutexes are replaced by tasks and async, etc. Eventually the idea is to subset C++ so that we can rip the C out of C++. https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppC...
In The Problem with Friendly C
> I'd like to see a free C compiler that clearly defines, and permanently commits to, carefully designed semantics for everything that's labelled "undefined" or "unspecified" or "implementation-defined" in the C "standard". That wouldn't just be a new compiler. That would be a new language. I dont think there are any short cuts to fix C. C++ is doing something somewhat similar with the "C++ Core Guideline" rules, which are designed to be checkable by static analysis tool. The long term goal is that eventually C++ will become a safe subset, when all the error-prone parts of the language have replacements. > "Following the rules will lead to code that is statically type safe, has no resource leaks, and catches many more programming logic errors than is common in code today. And it will run fast - you can afford to do things right." http
Read the rest
In Boringcc: Proposal for a C compiler for secure software
Here CppCon 2015: Herb Sutter "Writing Good C++14... By Default" around 00:32:00. https://youtu.be/hEx5DNLWGgA?t=2053 > The work-in-progress ISO Core C++ lifetime profile does not work on unmodified code and requires a lot of annotations… Herb mentions that it still less than lifetimes in Rust given C++'s type system: https://youtu.be/hEx5DNLWGgA?t=1653 https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/raw/09aef9bd86d9...
In IncludeOS roadmap: tiny Node.js-style web services in highly efficient C++
I'm referring mainly to [[lifetime(this)]] and friends. Those correspond directly to the lifetime annotations in Rust. Read the paper for more details. > In fact, Herb made a point that having too many anotations was a weakness of Rust, and that they wanted to not have those annotations. That's because Herb didn't understand Rust. > Perhaps you are thinking of Herb's slides where he shows things like _In_reads_(num). Those are not part of GSL. No, I'm referring to the annotations I saw in the paper: https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/docs...
In Rust Lifetimes
I'm excited for Jai, and if it ever makes it out into the world I look forward to building some games with it. However, I just see C++ continuing to get better and better for games programming. The recent appearance of the Core Guidelines [1] (and the eventual codified form for compilers) will be a huge leap. I wish we had full #run-type control over the compile phase, but full constexpr support is a step of the way there. 1. https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppC...
In JAI Primer: A Programming Language for Games

Showing the 15 most recent of 21 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.