44 ms·

The c++ library argument is funny to me because it’s so incredibly difficult to import external projects in c++. This is where Rust is going to eat their lunch.

pjmlp 6y ago
Had C++ standed still, yes. Except that now there is vcpkg, conan, prefab (on Android) and contrary to cargo,they support binary libraries, meaning I don't have to build the world every time I start a new project.
- yahyaheee 6y ago
  C++ has had ages to solve this problem, vcpkg and conan are still a ways away from the simplicity of cargo. Doesn't support binary libraries? I don't really care considering everything else I get, I'm sure they'll support that in the future.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Cargo is only simple if one is doing FOSS with Rust only code. Speaking of modern landscape where is a Rust IDE comparable with VS, C++ Builder, QtCreator?
    - bluejekyll 6y ago
      Cargo supports non-public package repositories, not sure what you’re referring to here? You got a similar response in another thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24038376 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24038376
      - estebank 6y ago
        They are complaining about no support for binary-only crates, which is not cargo's fault, but rather Rust's lack of stable ABI.
        bluejekyll 6y ago
        Ah. With decompilers these days, what’s the point? I only want that for the potential speed of overall compilation benefits.
- nilkn 6y ago
  Conan and vcpkg are not even remotely standardized on in the C++ community, and C++ teams I've worked on/with recently wouldn't use either of them, preferring raw CMake only. That said, if the whole community could really get behind one of them and throw immense support behind it for several years, it would probably be possible to largely solve this problem for C++.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Those on Microsoft world will need to get used to vcpkg, no matter what, because that is how Microsoft is now delivering some of their C++ libraries.
jfkebwjsbx 6y ago
This keeps being repeated and repeated and it is just a myth. Even without a package manager adding dependencies manually is quite easy for the vast majority of popular libraries. With a manager it is the same as cargo. I assume you are talking about old, broken, unsupported, closed source, binary only libraries, but then it is not a meaningful comparison.
- yahyaheee 6y ago
  Its really not, even with current libraries, not when you come from languages that have a modern packaging system. This is exemplary of why Rust will win out in the end. The c++ crowd can't acknowledge its shortcomings and fix them in a meaningful way
  - jfkebwjsbx 6y ago
    It is the same for cargo, npm, pip, C++ managers and other languages. Usually a single line does it in all of them, either in the shell or in a config file. I call FUD.
    - yahyaheee 6y ago
      It was rarely a single line with C++ when I used it over the last year, moving to cargo it is literally always a single line and I was done. Rust is going to make the C++ community actually look in the mirror for the first time in who knows how long.
      - jfkebwjsbx 6y ago
        So that project didn't use a package manager and you extrapolate that to an entire ecosystem.
        yahyaheee 6y ago
        Its sooo many projects, if the argument is that c++ has all these libraries, thats mute, but again the c++ devs just think everything is fine!
d1zzy 6y ago
I think adding external projects to a C++ project is a major decision that should be taken very carefully and the amount of research you need to do to make such a decision pales in comparison with just how exactly you integrate it in your project so you can #include its headers and link against its libraries. Then once all that work has been done it's now part of the internal repository so using it with any number of internal projects should be quite easy.
- yahyaheee 6y ago
  In the modern world you should be able to grab things and quickly integrate them and see how they work as your prototyping projects. C++ doesn't conform to this model.
cmrdporcupine 6y ago
You're defiantly missing the point and beating it to death. The issue for you might be ease of configuration, but that's not the issue I was talking about. It's availability of libraries and toolkits, which C++ still dominates in the realms of mathematics, graphics & video, GPU programming, gaming, embedded, networking, etc. And if there's something not available for C++ chances are it's there for C and easily used or wrapped. Configuration management has indeed been C and C++'s weak point, but in the last 5-10 years things have definitely improved since the world of autotools and the like, and while I appreciate Rust's module and package system for what it is... I can get by with CMake + Hunter or similar systems. And besides, for my day job (Google) it's either C++ with GN/Ninja or C++ with Blaze/Bazel. And that is also quite excellent for what it is. At this point my career being able to quickly try out a package or rapidly add a new dependency isn't my measure of quality engineering. In my past life I was a Java developer and a big Maven advocate (when it was pretty new); and the world of bottomless dependency trees that spawned is not something I'm eager to repeat. These days I try to keep my external dependencies ... strategic.
- yahyaheee 6y ago
  packaging == community and community is the most important aspect of a language. Yes c++ still dominates in accelerated computing but it won't for long. All these conversations I've had with c++ devs have just assured me of its demise. Why would the next generation of developers ever use c++ over Rust? Don't have a library? Great thats my chance to make my mark.

pjmlp 6y ago

Had C++ standed still, yes. Except that now there is vcpkg, conan, prefab (on Android) and contrary to cargo,they support binary libraries, meaning I don't have to build the world every time I start a new project.

yahyaheee 6y ago
C++ has had ages to solve this problem, vcpkg and conan are still a ways away from the simplicity of cargo. Doesn't support binary libraries? I don't really care considering everything else I get, I'm sure they'll support that in the future.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Cargo is only simple if one is doing FOSS with Rust only code. Speaking of modern landscape where is a Rust IDE comparable with VS, C++ Builder, QtCreator?
  - bluejekyll 6y ago
    Cargo supports non-public package repositories, not sure what you’re referring to here? You got a similar response in another thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24038376 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24038376
    - estebank 6y ago
      They are complaining about no support for binary-only crates, which is not cargo's fault, but rather Rust's lack of stable ABI.
      - bluejekyll 6y ago
        Ah. With decompilers these days, what’s the point? I only want that for the potential speed of overall compilation benefits.
nilkn 6y ago
Conan and vcpkg are not even remotely standardized on in the C++ community, and C++ teams I've worked on/with recently wouldn't use either of them, preferring raw CMake only. That said, if the whole community could really get behind one of them and throw immense support behind it for several years, it would probably be possible to largely solve this problem for C++.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Those on Microsoft world will need to get used to vcpkg, no matter what, because that is how Microsoft is now delivering some of their C++ libraries.

jfkebwjsbx 6y ago

This keeps being repeated and repeated and it is just a myth. Even without a package manager adding dependencies manually is quite easy for the vast majority of popular libraries. With a manager it is the same as cargo. I assume you are talking about old, broken, unsupported, closed source, binary only libraries, but then it is not a meaningful comparison.

yahyaheee 6y ago
Its really not, even with current libraries, not when you come from languages that have a modern packaging system. This is exemplary of why Rust will win out in the end. The c++ crowd can't acknowledge its shortcomings and fix them in a meaningful way
- jfkebwjsbx 6y ago
  It is the same for cargo, npm, pip, C++ managers and other languages. Usually a single line does it in all of them, either in the shell or in a config file. I call FUD.
  - yahyaheee 6y ago
    It was rarely a single line with C++ when I used it over the last year, moving to cargo it is literally always a single line and I was done. Rust is going to make the C++ community actually look in the mirror for the first time in who knows how long.
    - jfkebwjsbx 6y ago
      So that project didn't use a package manager and you extrapolate that to an entire ecosystem.
      - yahyaheee 6y ago
        Its sooo many projects, if the argument is that c++ has all these libraries, thats mute, but again the c++ devs just think everything is fine!

d1zzy 6y ago

I think adding external projects to a C++ project is a major decision that should be taken very carefully and the amount of research you need to do to make such a decision pales in comparison with just how exactly you integrate it in your project so you can #include its headers and link against its libraries. Then once all that work has been done it's now part of the internal repository so using it with any number of internal projects should be quite easy.

yahyaheee 6y ago
In the modern world you should be able to grab things and quickly integrate them and see how they work as your prototyping projects. C++ doesn't conform to this model.

cmrdporcupine 6y ago

You're defiantly missing the point and beating it to death. The issue for you might be ease of configuration, but that's not the issue I was talking about. It's availability of libraries and toolkits, which C++ still dominates in the realms of mathematics, graphics & video, GPU programming, gaming, embedded, networking, etc. And if there's something not available for C++ chances are it's there for C and easily used or wrapped. Configuration management has indeed been C and C++'s weak point, but in the last 5-10 years things have definitely improved since the world of autotools and the like, and while I appreciate Rust's module and package system for what it is... I can get by with CMake + Hunter or similar systems. And besides, for my day job (Google) it's either C++ with GN/Ninja or C++ with Blaze/Bazel. And that is also quite excellent for what it is. At this point my career being able to quickly try out a package or rapidly add a new dependency isn't my measure of quality engineering. In my past life I was a Java developer and a big Maven advocate (when it was pretty new); and the world of bottomless dependency trees that spawned is not something I'm eager to repeat. These days I try to keep my external dependencies ... strategic.

yahyaheee 6y ago
packaging == community and community is the most important aspect of a language. Yes c++ still dominates in accelerated computing but it won't for long. All these conversations I've had with c++ devs have just assured me of its demise. Why would the next generation of developers ever use c++ over Rust? Don't have a library? Great thats my chance to make my mark.