5 ms·

I disagree. As others have pointed out, the demand for C++ jobs is still much higher than Rust jobs, so I think my answer still stands as a way to set yourself

I disagree. As others have pointed out, the demand for C++ jobs is still much higher than Rust jobs, so I think my answer still stands as a way to set yourself apart when thinking of a new language to spend a few months on. Ideally, one would learn Rust and C++ both and see how they differ, and why.

pcwalton 11y ago
> I disagree. As others have pointed out, the demand for C++ jobs is still much higher than Rust jobs, so I think my answer still stands as a way to set yourself apart when thinking of a new language to spend a few months on. It's not going to be a particularly interesting thread if everyone who works in a language that trends higher than Go on Google chimes in to say "you should learn my language instead, because it's more popular". > Ideally, one would learn Rust and C++ both and see how they differ, and why. Aside from uninteresting language-specific details, C++ essentially doesn't teach you anything that Rust doesn't.
- hellofunk 11y ago
  >It's not going to be a particularly interesting thread if everyone who works in a language that trends higher than Go on Google chimes in to say "you should learn my language instead, because it's more popular". I think C++ is unique in that it is really not as popular as many new languages, not as trendy and as much in the news, and not even taught as much in college programs, yet, it remains the language where so many jobs are. This gives anyone with the desire to learn it a good and marketable skill that can make it possibly easier to find work and continue making a living doing software development. That does not apply to Rust, so I think it's a fair point to make to anyone who is asking about what languages are good to learn. As for whether C++ has any techniques to teach that Rust does not, C++ is definitely a unique experience to go through and certainly gives a developer more insight into the actual machine they are working on in a way that few languages do.
  - pcwalton 11y ago
    > it remains the language where so many jobs are "The" language where so many jobs are? It's one of many. > As for whether C++ has any techniques to teach that Rust does not, C++ is definitely a unique experience to go through and certainly gives a developer more insight into the actual machine they are working on in a way that few languages do. Can you name, specifically, a way in which C++ gives you "more insight into the actual machine" compared to Rust?
    - hellofunk 11y ago
      I think that Rust simplifies some things that you must do yourself in C++, and learning how to do them is valuable. At the very least, it will help you appreciate other languages, but it can also show you areas where you get manual control over performance in ways no other language offers. And, perhaps most significantly, there are a wealth of C++ libraries out there that have no equivalent in other languages, and being able to use them is an education in itself.
      - cjfont 11y ago
        If my understanding is correct, you can use any of those C++ libraries from Rust as well.
        kibwen 11y ago
        If those C++ libraries expose a C API, then yes.
      - yoklov 11y ago
        As someone who has written a lot of C++ (and essentially no rust), I think you're mischaracterizing C++. It has a lot of magic that the compiler does for you under the hood, and even more if you are using libraries. If you want to understand what is actually happening on the machine, I do not think it is the best choice. C would be much better.
      - nickpsecurity 11y ago
- neppo 11y ago
  OPs asked which language to learn from a career perspective, so C++ is good advice in that respect
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- fiedzia 11y ago
  Well, it may teach you why its a good idea to throw away old features every couple of decades :-)
nickpsecurity 11y ago
You must say the same thing about COBOL in other threads. Demand for it remains high with people getting paid a premium in some areas for the shortage. Something like a billion lines of it out there. Microfocus is probably hiring, too. So, anyone following your argument should skip C++ and learn COBOL because COBOL is easier to learn, in widespread use, and has jobs available.
- hellofunk 11y ago
  Interesting point. I was curious about this, and turned to Wikipedia: >In 2006 and 2012, Computerworld surveys found that over 60% of organizations used COBOL (more than C++ and Visual Basic .NET) and that for half of those, COBOL was used for the majority of their internal software. 36% of managers said they planned to migrate from COBOL, and 25% said they would like to if it was cheaper. Instead, some businesses have migrated their systems from expensive mainframes to cheaper, more modern systems, while maintaining their COBOL programs.
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    It was an extremely, easy-to-use language that even laypeople could write business logic in. Similar to how BASIC got so many people started. Except, Fortune 500 companies were writing all their backend stuff in COBOL on mainframes from the 60's onward. Needless to say, there's a lot of it around dependent on existing libraries, interfaces, language variants, compilers, etc. Porting it is huge risk. So, they just maintain and extend it. Main vendor even has it on Visual Studio: http://www.microfocus.com/solutions/cobol/index.aspx http://www.microfocus.com/solutions/cobol/index.aspx The job is boring, predictable, and 9-5-ish at most places. Exactly what some types of people are looking for. They figure they can play with the fun stuff at home. One person even jokingly made a web framework for it: COBOL on Cogs. So, yeah, I throw COBOL at anyone using the "use language X for users or jobs" argument to see how they react to what they're actually arguing. Interesting that you at least looked it up and didn't go into denial mode. I'm impressed. ;)

pcwalton 11y ago

> I disagree. As others have pointed out, the demand for C++ jobs is still much higher than Rust jobs, so I think my answer still stands as a way to set yourself apart when thinking of a new language to spend a few months on. It's not going to be a particularly interesting thread if everyone who works in a language that trends higher than Go on Google chimes in to say "you should learn my language instead, because it's more popular". > Ideally, one would learn Rust and C++ both and see how they differ, and why. Aside from uninteresting language-specific details, C++ essentially doesn't teach you anything that Rust doesn't.

hellofunk 11y ago
>It's not going to be a particularly interesting thread if everyone who works in a language that trends higher than Go on Google chimes in to say "you should learn my language instead, because it's more popular". I think C++ is unique in that it is really not as popular as many new languages, not as trendy and as much in the news, and not even taught as much in college programs, yet, it remains the language where so many jobs are. This gives anyone with the desire to learn it a good and marketable skill that can make it possibly easier to find work and continue making a living doing software development. That does not apply to Rust, so I think it's a fair point to make to anyone who is asking about what languages are good to learn. As for whether C++ has any techniques to teach that Rust does not, C++ is definitely a unique experience to go through and certainly gives a developer more insight into the actual machine they are working on in a way that few languages do.
- pcwalton 11y ago
  > it remains the language where so many jobs are "The" language where so many jobs are? It's one of many. > As for whether C++ has any techniques to teach that Rust does not, C++ is definitely a unique experience to go through and certainly gives a developer more insight into the actual machine they are working on in a way that few languages do. Can you name, specifically, a way in which C++ gives you "more insight into the actual machine" compared to Rust?
  - hellofunk 11y ago
    I think that Rust simplifies some things that you must do yourself in C++, and learning how to do them is valuable. At the very least, it will help you appreciate other languages, but it can also show you areas where you get manual control over performance in ways no other language offers. And, perhaps most significantly, there are a wealth of C++ libraries out there that have no equivalent in other languages, and being able to use them is an education in itself.
    - cjfont 11y ago
      If my understanding is correct, you can use any of those C++ libraries from Rust as well.
      - kibwen 11y ago
        If those C++ libraries expose a C API, then yes.
    - yoklov 11y ago
      As someone who has written a lot of C++ (and essentially no rust), I think you're mischaracterizing C++. It has a lot of magic that the compiler does for you under the hood, and even more if you are using libraries. If you want to understand what is actually happening on the machine, I do not think it is the best choice. C would be much better.
    - nickpsecurity 11y ago
neppo 11y ago
OPs asked which language to learn from a career perspective, so C++ is good advice in that respect
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
fiedzia 11y ago
Well, it may teach you why its a good idea to throw away old features every couple of decades :-)

nickpsecurity 11y ago

You must say the same thing about COBOL in other threads. Demand for it remains high with people getting paid a premium in some areas for the shortage. Something like a billion lines of it out there. Microfocus is probably hiring, too. So, anyone following your argument should skip C++ and learn COBOL because COBOL is easier to learn, in widespread use, and has jobs available.

hellofunk 11y ago
Interesting point. I was curious about this, and turned to Wikipedia: >In 2006 and 2012, Computerworld surveys found that over 60% of organizations used COBOL (more than C++ and Visual Basic .NET) and that for half of those, COBOL was used for the majority of their internal software. 36% of managers said they planned to migrate from COBOL, and 25% said they would like to if it was cheaper. Instead, some businesses have migrated their systems from expensive mainframes to cheaper, more modern systems, while maintaining their COBOL programs.
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  It was an extremely, easy-to-use language that even laypeople could write business logic in. Similar to how BASIC got so many people started. Except, Fortune 500 companies were writing all their backend stuff in COBOL on mainframes from the 60's onward. Needless to say, there's a lot of it around dependent on existing libraries, interfaces, language variants, compilers, etc. Porting it is huge risk. So, they just maintain and extend it. Main vendor even has it on Visual Studio: http://www.microfocus.com/solutions/cobol/index.aspx http://www.microfocus.com/solutions/cobol/index.aspx The job is boring, predictable, and 9-5-ish at most places. Exactly what some types of people are looking for. They figure they can play with the fun stuff at home. One person even jokingly made a web framework for it: COBOL on Cogs. So, yeah, I throw COBOL at anyone using the "use language X for users or jobs" argument to see how they react to what they're actually arguing. Interesting that you at least looked it up and didn't go into denial mode. I'm impressed. ;)