4 ms·
>At the end of the day, you want the best programmers you can afford on any project, so I don't think it's a particularly compelling argument to say that Blub i
by gte910h 16y ago
>At the end of the day, you want the best programmers you can afford on any project, so I don't think it's a particularly compelling argument to say that Blub is a better language because it lets less-qualified people get work done faster.
That's complete pap. Of COURSE you want less capable people to get things done. That's the entire point of junior and midlevel developers. Less expensive is sometimes (not always) more useful than being super great. You act like only very good dev's with 8-13 year of industry experience are any use at all with that attitude. Some things really shouldn't require geniuses to do.
- timr 16y ago"You act like only very good dev's with 8-13 year of industry experience are any use at all with that attitude. Some things really shouldn't require geniuses to do." You're overstating the claim. You don't need to be a "genius" to be productive in C++. Yes, there's a learning curve. It may even be a little steeper than in other languages, but it's entirely possible for a smart new grad to contribute meaningfully to a large C++ project. It happens at Microsoft and Google and thousands of other companies every single year. This line of argument against C++ is entirely overblown.