4 ms·

This logic doesn't make sense. If something increases productivity and code quality, why wouldn't languages copy it? Ideally languages should also remove unnece

by typon 7y ago

This logic doesn't make sense. If something increases productivity and code quality, why wouldn't languages copy it? Ideally languages should also remove unnecessary features, which is actually the thing that makes C++ a confusing mess: it's prioritization of backwards compatibility over keeping complexity low.

vmchale 7y ago
> it's prioritization of backwards compatibility over keeping complexity low. There are other languages on less-shaky foundations, but people don't use them for various legitimate and illegitimate reasons.
pjc50 7y ago
> languages should also remove unnecessary features Languages are effectively immutable. Unless you can reach out and edit every single piece of code that breaks when you remove a feature, you can't remove a feature from a language. You can only create a new, almost identical language, and then spend a decade migrating people. This is what happened to Python2/3. Very few things have been successfully deprecated in C or C++. Even massive security holes in the standard library.
- Supermancho 7y ago
  > You can only create a new, almost identical language, Thats demonstrably false. Python was a loud transition, but most of the language warts and syntax is still there. Same as the Php and perl transitions and the wacky es6 or java. The list goes on.
  - a1369209993 7y ago
    > most of the language warts and syntax is still there. > > new, almost identical language, Emphasis added.
    - Supermancho 7y ago
      >> new, almost identical language, Either it means it's a different language or it's a new language. The ambiguity in interpretation leads to a statement of non-meaningful change (tautology) or a statement of important change. The gracious interpretation is the only thing worth responding to, not quibbling over the possible non-statement.
- a1369209993 7y ago
  > This is what happened to Python2/3. Nitpick (and also proving your point): there is no language Python2; you mean Python vs Python3.

by typon 7y ago

vmchale 7y ago

> it's prioritization of backwards compatibility over keeping complexity low. There are other languages on less-shaky foundations, but people don't use them for various legitimate and illegitimate reasons.

pjc50 7y ago

> languages should also remove unnecessary features Languages are effectively immutable. Unless you can reach out and edit every single piece of code that breaks when you remove a feature, you can't remove a feature from a language. You can only create a new, almost identical language, and then spend a decade migrating people. This is what happened to Python2/3. Very few things have been successfully deprecated in C or C++. Even massive security holes in the standard library.

Supermancho 7y ago
> You can only create a new, almost identical language, Thats demonstrably false. Python was a loud transition, but most of the language warts and syntax is still there. Same as the Php and perl transitions and the wacky es6 or java. The list goes on.
- a1369209993 7y ago
  > most of the language warts and syntax is still there. > > new, almost identical language, Emphasis added.
  - Supermancho 7y ago
    >> new, almost identical language, Either it means it's a different language or it's a new language. The ambiguity in interpretation leads to a statement of non-meaningful change (tautology) or a statement of important change. The gracious interpretation is the only thing worth responding to, not quibbling over the possible non-statement.
a1369209993 7y ago
> This is what happened to Python2/3. Nitpick (and also proving your point): there is no language Python2; you mean Python vs Python3.