3 ms·
When people use "C/C++" as a single language I usually know right away don't know much about C++. The distance between C and modern idiomatic C++ is many times
by dxuh 4y ago
When people use "C/C++" as a single language I usually know right away don't know much about C++. The distance between C and modern idiomatic C++ is many times larger than the distance between C++ and Rust. C++ looks like an ancient juvenile dialect of Rust compared to C and C++ looking almost nothing alike. You can write shit C++ that looks like C and breaks like C or you can write good C++ instead and end up with less (almost none in practice) memory problems also. This discussion comes up multiple times a week and almost never do the people having it actually know what they are talking about. I am aware this person is a big shot that has done great things, but it's still impossible he has seen actually good C++ written in the last 5 years. Not because it doesn't have memory bugs, because they are much harder to make. Language landscapes change and old languages die and new languages get popular, but it seems this whole thing is based on a giant strawman (that C++ is the same as C). It's very frustrating.
- ncmncm 4y agoYes. Use of the "C/C++" construction is a marker for one or more of ignorance, dishonesty, or laziness. Usually it doesn't matter which: into the round file it goes.
- nspattak 4y agoThe problem with "c/c++" is not that the people using this notation are ignorant of their difference. the problem is that there is nothing preventing someone writing c in a cpp file. what is more, it is up to every one/every project to choose the cpp subset to use. That is why i think the criticism is very very valid