4 ms·

> It's really crazy how much C++ has already evolved To borrow an old bit of snark: I don't know what the "default" programming language of 2025 will look like

> It's really crazy how much C++ has already evolved To borrow an old bit of snark: I don't know what the "default" programming language of 2025 will look like, but I know it will be called C++. Like Ethernet (the original subject of that snark), C++ has evolved into a form unrecognizable to those who saw its birth. Unlike Ethernet, the older forms haven't gone away. They still reappear often in large/old/important codebases, keeping compiler writers busy and everyone else less productive. I'm generally the last person to suggest replacing things that already work, but C++ really does just need to get paved over.

blub 8y ago
OP has been proselytizing Rust on HN like it's the new coming of the Messiah. This kind of language advertising where one can't even bother mentioning one negative thing about the product is sad but effective, because people want to believe that there's a perfect language out there...
- aldanor 8y ago
  My personal view: C++ has issues and problems because it's too old and it's not going to get rid of the old baggage, hence it will have to carry it forward while adding new stuff on top (concepts, ranges...). Those issues are not going away, they will only get worse over time. Rust has different kinds of issues and problems because it's still relatively young. For instance, pretty bad compile times (even compared to C++ with heavy templates use). But that's solvable, it will just take time. Most issues with the language itself that I've personally encountered were of the kind "it's not stabilized yet" or "it's not fully implemented yet".
- notacoward 8y ago
  > OP has been proselytizing Rust on HN like it's the new coming of the Messiah. That doesn't even come close to being relevant. Address the argument, not the person.
  - blub 8y ago
    Correcting the same misleading statements over and over again is a chat bot's job and not an enjoyable task for a human being. I was just pointing out that you're probably wasting your time, but you're of course free to discuss the finer points of class-based OO or Rust's learning curve for the Nth time, if you're so inclined.

blub 8y ago

OP has been proselytizing Rust on HN like it's the new coming of the Messiah. This kind of language advertising where one can't even bother mentioning one negative thing about the product is sad but effective, because people want to believe that there's a perfect language out there...

aldanor 8y ago
My personal view: C++ has issues and problems because it's too old and it's not going to get rid of the old baggage, hence it will have to carry it forward while adding new stuff on top (concepts, ranges...). Those issues are not going away, they will only get worse over time. Rust has different kinds of issues and problems because it's still relatively young. For instance, pretty bad compile times (even compared to C++ with heavy templates use). But that's solvable, it will just take time. Most issues with the language itself that I've personally encountered were of the kind "it's not stabilized yet" or "it's not fully implemented yet".
notacoward 8y ago
> OP has been proselytizing Rust on HN like it's the new coming of the Messiah. That doesn't even come close to being relevant. Address the argument, not the person.
- blub 8y ago
  Correcting the same misleading statements over and over again is a chat bot's job and not an enjoyable task for a human being. I was just pointing out that you're probably wasting your time, but you're of course free to discuss the finer points of class-based OO or Rust's learning curve for the Nth time, if you're so inclined.