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

Pages: 1-4041-

C++ is a better C

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 8:11

http://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/92947809761890304
C++, with discretion, is a better C, and I do not recommend coding large projects in straight C.
There you have it. The man is a rocket scientist, just try and prove him wrong.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 8:16

That's the same faggot that said Direct3D has been better than OpenGL since Direct3D9.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 8:22

straight C
There's a gay C? For faggots? Fuck that shit.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 8:23

>>3
Objective-C

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 8:39

>>2
Which confirms that he knows what he's talking about.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 9:28

>>1
This says much about C and C++.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 9:29

>>2
Direct3D has been better since Direct3D9. Hell, OpenGL still can't do multi-threaded deferred display lists/deferred render contexts, while Direct3D11 has supported it since 2009.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 9:57

You still program in C++?  And how did you power up the PC?  Steam power?  Do you like your dinosaur steak raw, seeing how that's how everybody was doing it prior to the discovery of *fire*!

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 10:28

>>8
Just because a language is new and hip doesn't mean it's necessarily better. There are not really any other high-level languages that have managed to trump C++'s performance track record. Most hipster languages like FIOC, Ruby, Lua, etc. often generate programs that 50x slower or more.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 10:31

>>9
FORTRAN is faster than C++.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 10:34

>>10
FORTRAN is older and targets a somewhat more specialized domain, and is only faster at certain things.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 10:46

>>9
SEPPLES is an abomination. It is a pathetic attempt at extending C to support a part of Common Lisp by introducing a shitload of syntax and automatic polymorphic code generation.
If you want low-level programming, use C or assembly, not SEPPLES.
If you want high-level programming, use a true high-level language, not SEPPLES.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:06

>>12
C++ is only an abomination among hipsters and undergraduates who fail to understand it. Anyone who has been programming with C++ for several years or more knows its shortcomings, but also how to successfully utilize all of its strength.

Experienced C++ programmers chose to use C++, ship their code on time and budget, meet and exceed the performance requirements, get paid and then get laid.

You need to get over it.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:10

>>13
I'm pretty sure those programmers would probably be as good if not better using C or Common Lisp.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:14

>>13
That's what they said about C, FORTRAN, COBOL, hand-optimized assembly, ...

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:22

>>14
As such a programmer myself, I will disagree. Using pure C becomes tedious once you surpass around 50,000 LoC in project. C++ has some very nice things like templates and first-class object-oriented constructs which makes it less painful.

Common Lisp, while it's nice, is also a joke in the real working world, for various reasons which should be obvious to you if you've ever worked at a software development gig.

I tend to use a balanced mix of functional, generic, procedural, and object-oriented idioms for which C++ is a good match.

Other higher-level languages generally have worse performance, shoddy libraries and software frameworks, poor documentation and tools, aren't available on as many platforms as C++. The partial exceptions here are Java and C#, which have generally good documentation and libraries, but are less expressive languages than C++, worse-performing, and are also somewhat proprietary in nature and are controlled by single corporations (Oracle and Microsoft).

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:36

THEPPLETH ith for faggotth.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:45

>>16
50,000 LoC in project
So basically, that project contains a compiler, a software renderer, a garbage collector, and a full network stack?

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:52

>>18
That's only for expressive high-density low-bullshit languages.  You've never used C++ before, have you?

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:53

>>19
I admit I never used C++, because it scares me and I'm happy with C.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:54

>>18
Are you referring to Quake3? Your post is nothing more than a non-sequitar seeing as how >>1 points out how even John Carmack uses C++ these days. Games are more complex than they were a decade ago. Id Software's Rage code base is a few millions of LoC, for example. Source is: http://www.atomicgamer.com/articles/1234/rage-interview

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:58

>>19
Jokes aside, C++ if wielded correctly is high-density, low-bullshit. The problem is people trying to use too much OOP, which brings in tons of boilerplate and patterns, when they should be aiming for a more balanced repertoire. Java is far worse than C++ in this regard.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 11:59

>>18
Or actually, I guess you were referring to the original Quake, seeing as how Q3A didn't have a software renderer.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 12:04

I'm not referring to any project in particular. I just think that if a project contains 50,000 lines of interdependent, unexternalizable code, there must be something seriously wrong with its design.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 12:50

>>24
That's how we know that you never have written anything serious in C.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 12:54

>>25
Well, Ive implemented a green thread system capable of running a sleep sort and read SICP. I think I can consider myself a good programmer.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 15:10

>>1
The man is a rocket scientist
When was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_jump became science?

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 15:23

C++ is slower, as it indulges the use of smart-pointers and virtual classes everywhere. It also compiles slowly (about 3 slower than C) and changing a header would require whole program recompilation.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 15:55

>>26
IHBT

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 17:28

Hey mådderføkkers, any modern project should be written in Python which is easily extended with high performance modules and objects written in C.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 17:49

>>30
Python is a toy language. Its reference implementation doesn't even optimize tail-calls.
Stick with C and Common Lisp.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 17:52

>>31
And if you go ENTERPRISE, Sepples.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 18:15

>>31-32
None of those optimize tail calls, by the way.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 18:16

>>30
Back to Reddit, ``faggot''

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 18:17

>>33
tail call is a new trolling meme.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 20:31

>>30
Python is 500x slower than C++.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 20:32

>>28
That doesn't make C++ slower. It makes smart-pointers and virtual classes slower. There's nothing forcing you to use them.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 20:43

>>33
Clang/LLVM will tail-call non-exported C/C++ functions.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 21:24

Who says you can't use C++ for low-level systems programming?

http://svn.haiku-os.org/haiku/haiku/trunk/src/system/kernel/

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 21:45

>>37
Managers force you to write code faster.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 21:48

>>38
IMPLEMENTATION DETAILS

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 21:50

>>41
http://llvm.org/docs/CodeGenerator.html#tailcallopt

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 22:01

>>42
No variable argument lists are used
Terrible!

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 22:14

>>43
Runtime variable argument lists are stupid for low-level systems programming.

C++11 has compile-time variadic template argument lists which compiles down to code that can be optimized with tail-calls.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-29 23:54

If it ain't Lisp, it's crap.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-30 0:05

If it's Lisp, it's shit.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-30 0:17

I'm straight for C.
But I would go tsundere for C++

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-30 13:50

>>12
You are forgetting that some people are just not good programmers, so they end up with better results if certain things are already implemented for them by other programmers.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-30 16:24

You are forgetting that some people are just not Richard Matthew Stallman, so they end up with better results if they bathe regularly and prepare their own meals.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-30 16:49

>>24
LoC is an abbreviation for "Libraries of Congress," not "lines of code."

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-30 20:42

>>1
carmack is human, he can commit mistakes too.

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-31 4:34

>>45-46
World of feces.
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -