5 ms·

>I want to congratulate the C++ standards committee for all the work they've been doing lately. And they're not even slowing down! The roadmap for C++17 looks l

>I want to congratulate the C++ standards committee for all the work they've been doing lately. And they're not even slowing down! The roadmap for C++17 looks like we'll get even more fantastic features... This is exactly why people avoid C++. More features != better language.

pjmlp 11y ago
Only languages that don't get used don't get more features.
nikbackm 11y ago
Many of these new features are ones that already exists in other languages and almost taken for granted these days (e.g. module system). Many others are in form of libraries, and the C++ standard library is quite anemic compared to e.g. C# and Java.
- bitwize 11y ago
  The sort of person who avoids C++ is not likely to embrace C# or Java.
  - tonyedgecombe 11y ago
    I'd like to think that someone who is smart enough to write good C++ is also smart enough to know when it is overkill for a project.
- fsloth 11y ago
  C# and Java generally fit different problems better than C++. If one can use C# instead of C++ (i.e. can cover all required platforms with it etc.) and it fits the required performance profile then that's the saner approach. Apples, oranges, etc.
izacus 11y ago
C++ is an officialy supported option for pretty much any platform out there - including iOS, Android and Windows. Together with relevant debuggers (eventhough the Android/NDK GDB integration leaves something to be desired). Rust isn't there yet and when opting for a longterm project you want stability, access to experienced developers and good time-tested libraries. I love the idea of Rust but I'd still not consider it for use-cases we use C++ in for at least a few years still.
- fsloth 11y ago
  Thanks, you wrote the exact thing I wanted to point out. For some reason people seem to forget there are still programmers for whom the only platform they need support for is not just the deployment server.
- dkersten 11y ago
  officially supported option for pretty much any platform out there Non-embedded platforms. Many embedded systems only officially support C.
jkyle 11y ago
There's no feature in C++ that you're required to use. Even classes. More features != bad language as long as you have a choice in the matter. However, a lack of features can definitely hurt if you need them.
- dikaiosune 11y ago
  The constraints tools place on projects can sometimes be as important as the features they include. A simple opinionated tool can frequently be preferable for encouraging good code when compared to a wide open field of possibilities.
- Al-Khwarizmi 11y ago
  Your choice in the matter ends when you need to interact with other people's code. Which, unless you are doing a single-person hobby project, is almost all the time. Maybe more features != bad language per se, but they definitely add cognitive cost to the language and this is bad if the cost is greater than the benefit. In the case of C++ I think they have gone overboard long ago.

pjmlp 11y ago

Only languages that don't get used don't get more features.

nikbackm 11y ago

Many of these new features are ones that already exists in other languages and almost taken for granted these days (e.g. module system). Many others are in form of libraries, and the C++ standard library is quite anemic compared to e.g. C# and Java.

bitwize 11y ago
The sort of person who avoids C++ is not likely to embrace C# or Java.
- tonyedgecombe 11y ago
  I'd like to think that someone who is smart enough to write good C++ is also smart enough to know when it is overkill for a project.
fsloth 11y ago
C# and Java generally fit different problems better than C++. If one can use C# instead of C++ (i.e. can cover all required platforms with it etc.) and it fits the required performance profile then that's the saner approach. Apples, oranges, etc.

izacus 11y ago

C++ is an officialy supported option for pretty much any platform out there - including iOS, Android and Windows. Together with relevant debuggers (eventhough the Android/NDK GDB integration leaves something to be desired). Rust isn't there yet and when opting for a longterm project you want stability, access to experienced developers and good time-tested libraries. I love the idea of Rust but I'd still not consider it for use-cases we use C++ in for at least a few years still.

fsloth 11y ago
Thanks, you wrote the exact thing I wanted to point out. For some reason people seem to forget there are still programmers for whom the only platform they need support for is not just the deployment server.
dkersten 11y ago
officially supported option for pretty much any platform out there Non-embedded platforms. Many embedded systems only officially support C.

jkyle 11y ago

There's no feature in C++ that you're required to use. Even classes. More features != bad language as long as you have a choice in the matter. However, a lack of features can definitely hurt if you need them.

dikaiosune 11y ago
The constraints tools place on projects can sometimes be as important as the features they include. A simple opinionated tool can frequently be preferable for encouraging good code when compared to a wide open field of possibilities.
Al-Khwarizmi 11y ago
Your choice in the matter ends when you need to interact with other people's code. Which, unless you are doing a single-person hobby project, is almost all the time. Maybe more features != bad language per se, but they definitely add cognitive cost to the language and this is bad if the cost is greater than the benefit. In the case of C++ I think they have gone overboard long ago.