3 ms·

> But I think many people with similar C++ experience would agree with me that it's pretty rare for it to actually be the right tool to use for software these d

> But I think many people with similar C++ experience would agree with me that it's pretty rare for it to actually be the right tool to use for software these days. Is this really the case? Personally, I see C++ (in general, not related to WASM) as a very powerful, modern language, plus it is standardized. Counting on the Lindy effect, I expect it to be around and of value for more than the next 40 years.

snovv_crash 4y ago
Agreed. If you want to do anything with actual deployment to production of image processing for example, and you can't run it in a docker container, then C++ is the only option to get access to the myriad of libraries available.
qsort 4y ago
Absolutely not, that quote is nuts. It is true that the use cases where you wouldn't pick C++ as your first choice are more popular now than they used to be, and it's probably also true that if you only know C++, learning something like Ruby or Python to complement your skillset is likely to be a smart career move. But come on, almost all the languages that are hip and get a lot of mindshare wish they had a fraction of C++'s usage and influence.
kllrnohj 4y ago
C++20 is honestly a pretty good language. So much of the anti-C++ sentiment seems to be from people who don't realize C++98 isn't what's in common use anymore (and I would absolutely agree C++98 was kinda shit in many ways) But realistically anything where performance is the primary goal, especially graphical or media things, C++ is still going to be on your very very short list of languages to use. Rust is a compelling alternative, but... that's kinda it. It's really a choice between those 2. And you certainly can't be faulted for going with the far more established and far more widely used C++ over the new upstart Rust.
- tialaramex 4y ago
  > C++20 is honestly a pretty good language. > C++98 was kinda shit in many ways > And you certainly can't be faulted for going with the far more established and far more widely used C++ over the new upstart Rust. This cake-and-eat-it approach doesn't work. Either you're choosing C++ 20, and you get modern luxuries like a starts_with() method on strings but your language is so fresh out of the box that your tools don't work properly yet and your compiler vendor fixes swathes of fundamental bugs in core C++ 20 features every release or you're choosing to say well, C++ is really one language, and then ew... this library I'm using thinks raw pointers signify ownership because it was first written in 2008. Also, although C++ cleaned up lots of things since C++ 98 (for example Bjarne's terrible "look at me, I have operator overloading" I/O Streams is pushed aside by a modern formatting library in C++ 20) the fundamental ethos remains the same - C++ will always pick the wrong defaults. I'm not talking about a couple of unlucky choices, it's impossible to be this unlucky, they must surely be doing it on purpose. Without Vittorio's Epochs, which they very deliberately did not take for C++ 20, they won't be able to fix the defaults.
  - kllrnohj 4y ago
    You're kinda ignoring the middle ground there? Intentionally maybe? Libraries written in 2008 and still maintained have long since moved to C++11 or C++14 or newer. The baseline is easily a post-C++11, which was a huge turning point. > C++ will always pick the wrong defaults Oh definitely. Bad defaults are probably my only remaining complaint with modern C++.

snovv_crash 4y ago

Agreed. If you want to do anything with actual deployment to production of image processing for example, and you can't run it in a docker container, then C++ is the only option to get access to the myriad of libraries available.

qsort 4y ago

Absolutely not, that quote is nuts. It is true that the use cases where you wouldn't pick C++ as your first choice are more popular now than they used to be, and it's probably also true that if you only know C++, learning something like Ruby or Python to complement your skillset is likely to be a smart career move. But come on, almost all the languages that are hip and get a lot of mindshare wish they had a fraction of C++'s usage and influence.

kllrnohj 4y ago

C++20 is honestly a pretty good language. So much of the anti-C++ sentiment seems to be from people who don't realize C++98 isn't what's in common use anymore (and I would absolutely agree C++98 was kinda shit in many ways) But realistically anything where performance is the primary goal, especially graphical or media things, C++ is still going to be on your very very short list of languages to use. Rust is a compelling alternative, but... that's kinda it. It's really a choice between those 2. And you certainly can't be faulted for going with the far more established and far more widely used C++ over the new upstart Rust.

tialaramex 4y ago
> C++20 is honestly a pretty good language. > C++98 was kinda shit in many ways > And you certainly can't be faulted for going with the far more established and far more widely used C++ over the new upstart Rust. This cake-and-eat-it approach doesn't work. Either you're choosing C++ 20, and you get modern luxuries like a starts_with() method on strings but your language is so fresh out of the box that your tools don't work properly yet and your compiler vendor fixes swathes of fundamental bugs in core C++ 20 features every release or you're choosing to say well, C++ is really one language, and then ew... this library I'm using thinks raw pointers signify ownership because it was first written in 2008. Also, although C++ cleaned up lots of things since C++ 98 (for example Bjarne's terrible "look at me, I have operator overloading" I/O Streams is pushed aside by a modern formatting library in C++ 20) the fundamental ethos remains the same - C++ will always pick the wrong defaults. I'm not talking about a couple of unlucky choices, it's impossible to be this unlucky, they must surely be doing it on purpose. Without Vittorio's Epochs, which they very deliberately did not take for C++ 20, they won't be able to fix the defaults.
- kllrnohj 4y ago
  You're kinda ignoring the middle ground there? Intentionally maybe? Libraries written in 2008 and still maintained have long since moved to C++11 or C++14 or newer. The baseline is easily a post-C++11, which was a huge turning point. > C++ will always pick the wrong defaults Oh definitely. Bad defaults are probably my only remaining complaint with modern C++.