Why is C++ hated so much here in /prog/? Many good software are written in C++.
I'm aware that there are some problems in the language and it is considered "hard" to master it, but why do so many people hate it? What harm has it done?
Software can be written much quicker when using some scripting languages like Python. Software can be writte slightly quicker when using some managed language like Java. But when using those languages, the resulting program will require more resources to run. So there is place for C++.
For example, I bet the web browser of 99% people browsing /prog/ is written in C++. It's not perfect language, but it is the best language for complex program with relatively small CPU and RAM requirements.
>>37 expecting the creator of C++ to say anything logical about C
keep your bloat to yourself
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-08 15:28
C++ is used for games, if only because of the rate of growth and refinement of gaming technologies and the advance of hardware is pressuring game makers to improve their graphics and engines to a level like never before, requiring more power, and thus, to use a language needier on CPU than C++ would be a fallacy.
>>54 when going for/against a language, don't forget practical arguments as well as "BUT ITS LITPPPPPPPPPH"
Sure, but would you mind define what makes a programming language ``practical''?
Lots of libraries? Then no new language will ever be practical.
Standard C FFI interface? It may be impratical to implement if the platform isn't C-based.
Standard C API? Then I either must write the implementation in C the way the interface, or implement the interface and pay some performance overhead because my internal API does not map 1:1 with it.
Standard ABI? Then I'm stuck with that ABI, and I can't improve on it without breaking everything. Also, portability issues.
Standard FFI? It must be flexible/abstract enough to accomodate any platform and calling convention that existed, exist, and will ever exist.
Is this just mental masturbation? C will be the standard for at least another 20 years? See the Y2K problem. 20 years are fucking nothing.
I like C++ and there's nothing you can do about it.
I know C++, C, Python, Java, C#, Javascript, PHP, PL/SQL plus some BASIC craps. From these, C++ is my favourite. I very much enjoy writing C, which is very different from writing C++, and it's not very productive. I also enjoy very much writing Python, which is fast to write, but ridiculously slow. I very much enjoy writing in C++, which is more productive than C and as fast C (if programmed well).
Of course, the chosen language depends on project. For most web stuff and misc scripting I would use Python. For desktop most applications I would use C++. For embedded micro chip programming I would use C.
Also, Lisp is shit.
Also, even though GC is shit, I'm planning on learning some FP language.. maybe OCaml or Haskell.
It may be impratical to implement if the platform isn't C-based.
Most high level languages are a superset of C-based. It is hard to find high level language that doesn't have some equivalent to the function call stack. If a language was designed to work well with such architectures, the restrictions would be evident, and you would only want to put up with the restrictions if you were writing code for that architecture. It's true that it woulnd't make sense to use a FFI for C in this scenario, but you probably wouldn't want to use the language on different architectures.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-08 18:41
>>64
>c++ is as fast as C
You obviously don't know shit, so your opinion is now irrelevant.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-08 18:42
It is hard to find high level language that doesn't have some equivalent to the function call stack.
Stackless Python.
>>65 Most high level languages are a superset of C-based. It is hard to find high level language that doesn't have some equivalent to the function call stack.
Cactus stacks, segmented stacks, stack implemented as a linked list of activation records instead of a contiguous block of memory, and even CPS exist today.
C's (most) calling conventions are not suitable for tail calling (and, thus, CPS), multiple arity functions, and Lisp-style varargs (put everything in a list, which is the same as Python's).
Implementations must either jump through several hoops to get C interop, or maintain two stacks (the C stack, and its stack), or rape the C stack and use that.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-08 19:45
>>70 stack implemented as a linked list of activation records instead of a contiguous block of memory
That's how the IBM System/360 and System/38 and their descendents do it. Arguments are also passed as a pointer in a specific register and stored in an entirely different location than the return address stack, and automatic variables are allocated from a heap and then deallocated before the procedure returns.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-08 19:47
>>65 Most high level languages I know are a superset of C-based
fixed that for you!
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-09 9:47
>>66
Well, actually one can make cleaner and faster code in C++ than one can with C. Templates are very useful.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-09 9:51
>>73
Templates are fucking slow. Debug them low-level if you can. So no, try again.
>>74
eh?? they only slow down the compilation process. They are not processed runtime.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-09 10:05
>>64
DKIYT, but other than JavaScript thats a pretty blubby list of languages. You should at least try some of the symbol manipulation languages more (Haskell isn't really one of them, Lisp is).
>>73
Templates are absolute shit. The merits and demerits of C++ are surely somewhat debateable, but templates being garbage is an objective fact.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-09 10:40
>>77
Hmm.. I might try some Lisp at some point, but Haskell seems more interesting right now. As a toy language of course, since C++ is for real stuff ;-) (don't take it too seriously)
>>78
Your "fact" seems to be quite subjective actually.