4 ms·

<rant> This talk was amazing, I was overwhelmed by the amount of work going into C++. The problem is that it is already an abysmally complex language (to me) a

<rant> This talk was amazing, I was overwhelmed by the amount of work going into C++. The problem is that it is already an abysmally complex language (to me) and it doesn't look like anything is getting simpler. It's as if you had to be there from the start to have a full image of how the language grew and truly understand the interplay between all the "features", otherwise it's too late to become an expert, and in some cases even too late to become comfortable writing good maintainable code in C++. Unfortunately nothing comes close to its level of "practical usefulness" in all dimensions (expressiveness, reasonable speed, ecosystem, etc...). I personally just stick to C because things are simple to understand and I just live with its shortcomings.

static_noise 11y ago
You don't need to use or master every tool in the shed. The hard part about C++ is to choose the right tools and to avoid the bad parts. Things like memory management and concurrency are actually getting better. - Put a smart pointer on the stack to handle your allocations. Share it and it persists. Forget about it and it deallocates your memory. No need to use raw pointers directly. - Use things like futures to manage your concurrency. No need to know the finer semantics of mutexes just to pass around a few values. - Templates enable a lot of cool stuff but you don't have to understand much about them to actually use them in a library. That being said, if C solves your problems well, use it. There is nothing wrong with that. If you only need some parts of C++, use them where it actually makes sense.
- jandrese 11y ago
  The only problem is that this makes it a bit of a write only language. When there is an ocean of language features you don't know much about because you never use them, it becomes a barrier to reading someone else's code and find that they use those features extensively. The worst is hotshot programmers that seem hellbent on using every feature a language offers because they just learned it in school and want to apply what they know, even though half of the time all they're doing is adding complexity for little gain.
filthydumbidiot 11y ago
To get an image of how the language grew (from a mid-90s perspective), you can read "The Design & Evolution of C++" by Bjarne Stroustrup. Then read "The C++ Programming Language (4th ed.)" to understand the new parts. And read "C++ Core Guidelines" (free on GitHub!) to grasp some best practices in modern C++. And, of course, practice.
ericmo 11y ago
"If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail". In C you have to build everything from scratch. If you need classes, hack some structs. If you need string concatenation, write some mallocs and strcpy, and so on. C is cool, but really, there's no way C is more "practical" than C++11, and C++14 will be even better.
- ThatGeoGuy 11y ago
  > and C++14 will be even better. Perhaps you mean C++17? Almost the entirety of C++14 is supported in the latest versions of all major compilers as of about the middle of last year. There are some pieces held back (particularly in GCC pre-5.0 and MSVC), however they are tiny parts of the standard which do not largely affect the majority of changes you'll make from C++98 to C++11/C++14.
  - ericmo 11y ago
    You're right, C++14 is pretty much out there already - problem is I'm still not using latest compilers, lol.
ThatGeoGuy 11y ago
> It's as if you had to be there from the start to have a full image of how the language grew and truly understand the interplay between all the "features", otherwise it's too late to become an expert, and in some cases even too late to become comfortable writing good maintainable code in C++. Although this is perhaps a poor anecdote more than anything, I myself only learned C++ six years ago (when I was learning to program, to boot). Overall the switch to using C++ today is more of an "unlearning" process, and requires that you don't treat the language as you would treat C (for better and or worse). Overall I don't think it's true that you had to be there from the start, as you could easily just learn C++11 and C++14 style idioms today and avoid the hairier parts of the language if you want to. Reading through Scott Meyers' books are a great start, but overall I found that switching to a more modern style was very easy if you already know some basic concepts from other languages (range-based for, what a lambda is, how auto / type-inference works). I guess really, is that I think giving up because C++ has evolved very differently from C or how other languages evolve just seems... defeatist?
autoreleasepool 11y ago
> It's as if you had to be there from the start to have a full image of how the language grew and truly understand the interplay between all the "features", otherwise it's too late to become an expert, and in some cases even too late to become comfortable writing good maintainable code in C++. This is funny to me (not in a condescending way) because I had the exact opposite thought today. I actually came back to C++ on my own fairly recently after learning about the modern version of the language. I was lamenting about how lucky I was to have started learning with C++14 because I didn't have to go through the horrible C++98 and C++03 eras. In fact I could simply ignore most of it. It's all about diving straight into the modern stuff. The biggest problem with learning C++ is that most textbooks, classes, university courses don't actually teach you the real C++ parts until the last 4 weeks of the courses. Instead they teach you "C with classes.. and std::cout". This has been acknowledged as an problem by some of the more prominent members of the committee. I urge you to watch Kate Gregory's talk from cppcon 2015 "Stop Teaching C". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnWhqhNdYyk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnWhqhNdYyk Not only is she a great presenter, but she makes amazing points about what is fundamentally wrong with how C++ is taught in classrooms around the globe. I really hope her talk makes some impact. I know I used to hate the language. That was when I was writing it for my university that for some reason didn't want to upgrade their 2007 gcc compiler. The C++ programming I learned from that course was so outdated that I literally cringe looking back. It's totally pointless to teach C++ that only compiles on legacy compilers. CS education can be so backwards sometimes. We have C++14 on every major compiler, people! Either way, I'm not optimistic the language will ever be popular on this website. From what I've observed, every C++ topic, project, or observation is used as an excuse to bash the language and talk about Rust.

static_noise 11y ago

You don't need to use or master every tool in the shed. The hard part about C++ is to choose the right tools and to avoid the bad parts. Things like memory management and concurrency are actually getting better. - Put a smart pointer on the stack to handle your allocations. Share it and it persists. Forget about it and it deallocates your memory. No need to use raw pointers directly. - Use things like futures to manage your concurrency. No need to know the finer semantics of mutexes just to pass around a few values. - Templates enable a lot of cool stuff but you don't have to understand much about them to actually use them in a library. That being said, if C solves your problems well, use it. There is nothing wrong with that. If you only need some parts of C++, use them where it actually makes sense.

jandrese 11y ago
The only problem is that this makes it a bit of a write only language. When there is an ocean of language features you don't know much about because you never use them, it becomes a barrier to reading someone else's code and find that they use those features extensively. The worst is hotshot programmers that seem hellbent on using every feature a language offers because they just learned it in school and want to apply what they know, even though half of the time all they're doing is adding complexity for little gain.

filthydumbidiot 11y ago

To get an image of how the language grew (from a mid-90s perspective), you can read "The Design & Evolution of C++" by Bjarne Stroustrup. Then read "The C++ Programming Language (4th ed.)" to understand the new parts. And read "C++ Core Guidelines" (free on GitHub!) to grasp some best practices in modern C++. And, of course, practice.

ericmo 11y ago

"If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail". In C you have to build everything from scratch. If you need classes, hack some structs. If you need string concatenation, write some mallocs and strcpy, and so on. C is cool, but really, there's no way C is more "practical" than C++11, and C++14 will be even better.

ThatGeoGuy 11y ago
> and C++14 will be even better. Perhaps you mean C++17? Almost the entirety of C++14 is supported in the latest versions of all major compilers as of about the middle of last year. There are some pieces held back (particularly in GCC pre-5.0 and MSVC), however they are tiny parts of the standard which do not largely affect the majority of changes you'll make from C++98 to C++11/C++14.
- ericmo 11y ago
  You're right, C++14 is pretty much out there already - problem is I'm still not using latest compilers, lol.

ThatGeoGuy 11y ago

autoreleasepool 11y ago

> It's as if you had to be there from the start to have a full image of how the language grew and truly understand the interplay between all the "features", otherwise it's too late to become an expert, and in some cases even too late to become comfortable writing good maintainable code in C++. This is funny to me (not in a condescending way) because I had the exact opposite thought today. I actually came back to C++ on my own fairly recently after learning about the modern version of the language. I was lamenting about how lucky I was to have started learning with C++14 because I didn't have to go through the horrible C++98 and C++03 eras. In fact I could simply ignore most of it. It's all about diving straight into the modern stuff. The biggest problem with learning C++ is that most textbooks, classes, university courses don't actually teach you the real C++ parts until the last 4 weeks of the courses. Instead they teach you "C with classes.. and std::cout". This has been acknowledged as an problem by some of the more prominent members of the committee. I urge you to watch Kate Gregory's talk from cppcon 2015 "Stop Teaching C". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnWhqhNdYyk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnWhqhNdYyk Not only is she a great presenter, but she makes amazing points about what is fundamentally wrong with how C++ is taught in classrooms around the globe. I really hope her talk makes some impact. I know I used to hate the language. That was when I was writing it for my university that for some reason didn't want to upgrade their 2007 gcc compiler. The C++ programming I learned from that course was so outdated that I literally cringe looking back. It's totally pointless to teach C++ that only compiles on legacy compilers. CS education can be so backwards sometimes. We have C++14 on every major compiler, people! Either way, I'm not optimistic the language will ever be popular on this website. From what I've observed, every C++ topic, project, or observation is used as an excuse to bash the language and talk about Rust.