2 ms·

Garbage collected languages are not really native languages. I don't see good enough alternatives to C++, which have enough support, not a steep learning curve

by jokoon 7y ago

Garbage collected languages are not really native languages. I don't see good enough alternatives to C++, which have enough support, not a steep learning curve, good backward compatibility with existing ecosystems, not owned by a single company, etc.

umanwizard 7y ago
Depending on your definition of "enough support", Rust might be what you want. > not a steep learning curve well, it's steeper than most languages, but less so than C++ IMO, especially if you're already familiar with C++ and therefore understand the problems Rust is intended to solve.
- jokoon 7y ago
  If you already know C, C++ is easier. You can still pick what you like in C++. Still ,there aren't that many languages that compile to native.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Yeah the list is indeed quite small. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compiled_language https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compiled_language
    - jokoon 7y ago
      When you cross that list with language usage, support etc, you don't have a lot left. My point is that maybe most of those languages are not suitable, and that nobody really like those languages. Just cross all the arguments I gave about those languages, how they score, etc: C/C++ are the most used language that compiles to native and it gets criticized. "There are languages people complain about, and languages people nobody uses" Meaning we only complain about language we use.
pjmlp 7y ago
Says who? They also compile to native code just like C++. If having a GC makes a language not native, then C++ isn't a native language as well. ISO C++11 introduced the GC API, C++/CLI and C++/CX dialects use a GC, Unreal C++ has a GC, regular C++ with Boehm GC is another option, C++ Builder has also a GC. ISO C++ is basically driven by Microsoft, Google, Apple, IBM, given the amount of employees that go to ISO meetings and submit papers. While it isn't a single corporation, it isn't a community driven process either. Who can put money on ISO get the features.

by jokoon 7y ago

umanwizard 7y ago

Depending on your definition of "enough support", Rust might be what you want. > not a steep learning curve well, it's steeper than most languages, but less so than C++ IMO, especially if you're already familiar with C++ and therefore understand the problems Rust is intended to solve.

jokoon 7y ago
If you already know C, C++ is easier. You can still pick what you like in C++. Still ,there aren't that many languages that compile to native.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  Yeah the list is indeed quite small. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compiled_language https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compiled_language
  - jokoon 7y ago
    When you cross that list with language usage, support etc, you don't have a lot left. My point is that maybe most of those languages are not suitable, and that nobody really like those languages. Just cross all the arguments I gave about those languages, how they score, etc: C/C++ are the most used language that compiles to native and it gets criticized. "There are languages people complain about, and languages people nobody uses" Meaning we only complain about language we use.

pjmlp 7y ago

Says who? They also compile to native code just like C++. If having a GC makes a language not native, then C++ isn't a native language as well. ISO C++11 introduced the GC API, C++/CLI and C++/CX dialects use a GC, Unreal C++ has a GC, regular C++ with Boehm GC is another option, C++ Builder has also a GC. ISO C++ is basically driven by Microsoft, Google, Apple, IBM, given the amount of employees that go to ISO meetings and submit papers. While it isn't a single corporation, it isn't a community driven process either. Who can put money on ISO get the features.