3 ms·

I think your parent was saying that people using the term "C/C++" are often muddy on the considerable differences between these two languages, and that it is a

I think your parent was saying that people using the term "C/C++" are often muddy on the considerable differences between these two languages, and that it is a red flag in a job description if the company cannot even manage to properly name the language they use.

gameswithgo 8y ago
If you are pedantic enough that you get irritated by "C/C++", which clearly denotes that they understand they are different languages, and only implies they may disagree with you on how much crossover knowledge there is, you probably won't be happy anywhere on earth except maybe the linux kernel team.
- tom_mellior 8y ago
  Back when I was reading comp.lang.c, people would often wonder by to ask for help with their "C/C++" programs which typically turned out to be C++. Such people were usually surprised when it was pointed out to them that they were in a C newsgroup and that that is a different language from C++. The confusion was widespread. It may have changed, but I wouldn't really expect that to be the case.
- sacado2 8y ago
  Not parent but I tend to think there are broadly 3 "languages", with 3 very different cultures and mindset: - C, which is, well, pure, raw C, - C++, which tends to gravitate toward modern C++ (C++11 and later), and focuses on avoiding C constructs (except when needed, eg for legacy reasons), - the so-called C/C++, which is C with a small subset of C++98 constructs, mainly classes, the public/private distinction, the string type, references, and not much more For a purist (either a C purist or a C++ purist), the third category feels like losing most advantages of the original language (simplicity and orthogonality of C, relative safety and expressiveness of C++) and getting drawbacks of both (name mangling and dangling pointers, both at the same time, yay!) For me, it would not be a red flag, but definitely a yellow one.
yitchelle 8y ago
But surely that is a function of the recruiter and not a function of the employer. Most recruiters are clueless about the technology they are recruiting for.
- fiedzia 8y ago
  Not in my experience. Recruiters may be clueless, but they will only pass what was given to them. Companies with well-defined requirements will either make sure they have recruiters who understand what they require or copy it precisely, or don't use recruiters as much and rely on communicating with developers directly. I had way better experience with those who say "you will be working on a project involving mainly X and maybe some Y" than ads stating "we are looking for C, Scala, CSS etc.". Some of course say "we have range of project and we want polyglots", but if they don't, its definitely lack of care and understanding of technology.

gameswithgo 8y ago

If you are pedantic enough that you get irritated by "C/C++", which clearly denotes that they understand they are different languages, and only implies they may disagree with you on how much crossover knowledge there is, you probably won't be happy anywhere on earth except maybe the linux kernel team.

tom_mellior 8y ago
Back when I was reading comp.lang.c, people would often wonder by to ask for help with their "C/C++" programs which typically turned out to be C++. Such people were usually surprised when it was pointed out to them that they were in a C newsgroup and that that is a different language from C++. The confusion was widespread. It may have changed, but I wouldn't really expect that to be the case.
sacado2 8y ago
Not parent but I tend to think there are broadly 3 "languages", with 3 very different cultures and mindset: - C, which is, well, pure, raw C, - C++, which tends to gravitate toward modern C++ (C++11 and later), and focuses on avoiding C constructs (except when needed, eg for legacy reasons), - the so-called C/C++, which is C with a small subset of C++98 constructs, mainly classes, the public/private distinction, the string type, references, and not much more For a purist (either a C purist or a C++ purist), the third category feels like losing most advantages of the original language (simplicity and orthogonality of C, relative safety and expressiveness of C++) and getting drawbacks of both (name mangling and dangling pointers, both at the same time, yay!) For me, it would not be a red flag, but definitely a yellow one.

yitchelle 8y ago

But surely that is a function of the recruiter and not a function of the employer. Most recruiters are clueless about the technology they are recruiting for.

fiedzia 8y ago
Not in my experience. Recruiters may be clueless, but they will only pass what was given to them. Companies with well-defined requirements will either make sure they have recruiters who understand what they require or copy it precisely, or don't use recruiters as much and rely on communicating with developers directly. I had way better experience with those who say "you will be working on a project involving mainly X and maybe some Y" than ads stating "we are looking for C, Scala, CSS etc.". Some of course say "we have range of project and we want polyglots", but if they don't, its definitely lack of care and understanding of technology.