Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Programming Language to Replace C++

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-11 21:49

I think we can all agree that C++ is a terrible language. So why is it still around?

When talking to most C++ users (game developers, systems programmers), I've found that most seem to recognize C++'s faults, but they don't really care. They aren't even the slightest bit interested in a new language that might solve its problems, even one that gives them all the power of C++ with none of the downsides. You can't even get them to look at something new.

Why is that? Why does everyone just 'live with it' without wanting to improve the situation?

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-16 2:19

>>50
That was my point; manual memory management inherently creates unsafe code because it's *not possible* for the compiler to statically verify that all of your memory deallocations are safe.
I was pointing out that there exists provably safe memory management which is equivalent to the manual case. This against your argument that manual memory management is inherently unsafe. I was not speaking on memory management in general, and in fact pointed that out at least once.

FREE THIS HERE. When this variable goes out of scope, free whatever it is pointing to.
Unless the compiler can ignore these annotations at its own discretion you've just added an unverified call to free(). How is this purported to be safe while the library call is inherently unsafe? I'm sure there's some subtle aspect of D that intends to make a difference here but I wish you'd be upfront about it.

Give me a break. Go has exceptions.
I never said otherwise. By "out of my face" I mean there is no extra level of indentation. The exceptional case logic is delineated separately, right where it should be. Erlang does an even better job here, but Go can't really adopt its mechanisms.

Other than that, they are *identical*.
Identical to what? C++'s exceptions? No. Erlang? Not a chance. There are some nuances in there, and it's not just syntax. I'm quite confident that there are meaningful if subtle semantic differences that makes Go's model identical to nothing else in existence.

Why are you being so ignorant all of a sudden? You weren't like this before.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List