3 ms·
I would like a C++ without the spider webs. Not different, we have plenty of different languages out there; I have no interest in debugging other peoples fancy
by andreasgonewild 9y ago
I would like a C++ without the spider webs. Not different, we have plenty of different languages out there; I have no interest in debugging other peoples fancy ideas. I just want a powerful language that lets me say what I mean without keeping 30 years of accumulated exceptions in mind.
- Doxin 9y agoYou should try D. It's pretty much C with some weirdness fixed and OOP added on. Do mind that it's not a weak language, D has some very simple but extremely powerful features that plain C doesn't have, or that C++ has in a too complex way.
- andreasgonewild 9y agoI've kept an eye on D over the years, but that's still too much magic for me. What C++ (and Lisp) gets right is providing user code with the same powers as the compiler. I realize that getting there is what turned them into complex beasts, but plenty could be left behind should one decide to make a clean cut. The problem from my perspective is that we're working both ends of the spectrum, backwards compatibility and fancy new ideas; but no energy is spent on cleaning up and refining what's already there.
- Doxin 9y ago> What C++ (and Lisp) gets right is providing user code with the same powers as the compiler. So what part of that isn't fulfilled by compile time function evaluation and mixins and it's extensive introspection features? I feel like maybe you haven't looked at D quite hard enough to see why it's awesome.