10 ms·

> It has a few standards, which is the problem. You mean C++03, C++11, C++14, C++17? Or something else? If you mean those, I fail to see the problem. The lang

by pdpi 10y ago

> It has a few standards, which is the problem. You mean C++03, C++11, C++14, C++17? Or something else? If you mean those, I fail to see the problem. The language isn't dead, so it's not static, and it evolves over time. Publishing a new standard every few years is the only way to keep all compilers aligned, rather than each going off in its own "with extra features!" direction.

Chris2048 10y ago
Yes, those. The differences between standards aren't trivial, and often the older standards have to be maintained. The standard already has lots of features, including a turing-complete sub-language. It is difficult to write code to standard (nothing that works, but is undefined either), that is safe, no segfaults, memory issue, secure, and all within a practical budget/timeline. Just being able to reason about the code more easily helps, or make strong assumptions (e.g. about safety).
- mikeyjk 10y ago
  What about smart pointers from c++11 onward? Seems like there are less reasons to have code seg fault these days.
- smarx007 10y ago
  > and often the older standards have to be maintained exactly! what's wrong with that?
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    resources of multiple kinds are either split, or otherwise there is only the latest version gets it.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  So? Do you know by heart the differences between each Ruby, Python, C#, Perl ..... version?
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    You're reducing the argument here. qualitative arguments (true/false) over quantitative (to what degree). Your argument is similar to: "Hitler is bad, but no one if perfect" - does that mean than anyone not perfect is equivalent to Hitler? Moving on; to focus on python it's not difficult to know the handful of changes between, say, python 2.5 and 2.7, nor to understand them. py3 is different, and the fork caused a lot of controversy, there is still resistance to py3. There is a python-2-to-python-3 tool (could any such thing practically exist between C++ versions?), but it's not perfect. A language like Java almost suffers from trying to remain backwards compatible, yes a) the feature is nonetheless appreciated, and java is heavily used and praised in 'enterprise' b) Java tends to make breaking changes rarely, and only when necessary - can the changes between C++ specs be described the same?

by pdpi 10y ago

Chris2048 10y ago

Yes, those. The differences between standards aren't trivial, and often the older standards have to be maintained. The standard already has lots of features, including a turing-complete sub-language. It is difficult to write code to standard (nothing that works, but is undefined either), that is safe, no segfaults, memory issue, secure, and all within a practical budget/timeline. Just being able to reason about the code more easily helps, or make strong assumptions (e.g. about safety).

mikeyjk 10y ago
What about smart pointers from c++11 onward? Seems like there are less reasons to have code seg fault these days.
smarx007 10y ago
> and often the older standards have to be maintained exactly! what's wrong with that?
- Chris2048 10y ago
  resources of multiple kinds are either split, or otherwise there is only the latest version gets it.
pjmlp 10y ago
So? Do you know by heart the differences between each Ruby, Python, C#, Perl ..... version?
- Chris2048 10y ago
  You're reducing the argument here. qualitative arguments (true/false) over quantitative (to what degree). Your argument is similar to: "Hitler is bad, but no one if perfect" - does that mean than anyone not perfect is equivalent to Hitler? Moving on; to focus on python it's not difficult to know the handful of changes between, say, python 2.5 and 2.7, nor to understand them. py3 is different, and the fork caused a lot of controversy, there is still resistance to py3. There is a python-2-to-python-3 tool (could any such thing practically exist between C++ versions?), but it's not perfect. A language like Java almost suffers from trying to remain backwards compatible, yes a) the feature is nonetheless appreciated, and java is heavily used and praised in 'enterprise' b) Java tends to make breaking changes rarely, and only when necessary - can the changes between C++ specs be described the same?