4 ms·

> I can't see new people reaching to learn C++ I guess you wrote this while knowing very well that it's just whishful thinking. People will keep learning C++ f

by j1elo 4y ago

> I can't see new people reaching to learn C++ I guess you wrote this while knowing very well that it's just whishful thinking. People will keep learning C++ for the foreseeable future, in order to reach the job market that this language opens up. And if "people" in this sentence meant the companies using it, then again not a chance in the short term. Most companies using C++ have huge codebases that will only be ported to something different when it makes financial sense for them to do it (which is something that almost never happens for an already existing codebase)

echelon 4y ago
> I guess you wrote this while knowing very well that it's just whishful thinking. People will keep learning C++ for the foreseeable future, in order to reach the job market that this language opens up. Just like FORTRAN. (Sorry for the snark! I do agree with your points.) > Most companies using C++ have huge codebases that will only be ported to something different when it makes financial sense for them to do it (which is something that almost never happens for an already existing codebase) Again, not disagreeing with you, but this is why it's good when companies get eaten by more nimble startups without the baggage. Legacy systems die due to business failure.
- smt88 4y ago
  There are billions more lines of C++ code in production than FORTRAN. It's not a good analogy.
  - gpderetta 4y ago
    And people still write FORTRAN today.
    - TchoBeer 4y ago
      Because Fortran is still top of its class at number crunching
    - jcelerier 4y ago
      Hell, the school I've been to has one of its curriculums still centered around Fortran - people come out of here and it's their primary language (and they've got no issues finding jobs at all)
- still_grokking 4y ago
  > Legacy systems die due to business failure. You mean like in the case of COBOL? ;-) OK, admitted, banks can't fail. They're protected by law of nature. (Or something like that).
- j1elo 4y ago
  Yeah, I agree with you. Note I'm a C++ dev who would like to see less of C++ and more of newer languages that have improved upon mistakes of previous ones. But my opinion is that C++ will remain king for a long time in those niches where it has established itself.

by j1elo 4y ago

echelon 4y ago

> I guess you wrote this while knowing very well that it's just whishful thinking. People will keep learning C++ for the foreseeable future, in order to reach the job market that this language opens up. Just like FORTRAN. (Sorry for the snark! I do agree with your points.) > Most companies using C++ have huge codebases that will only be ported to something different when it makes financial sense for them to do it (which is something that almost never happens for an already existing codebase) Again, not disagreeing with you, but this is why it's good when companies get eaten by more nimble startups without the baggage. Legacy systems die due to business failure.

smt88 4y ago
There are billions more lines of C++ code in production than FORTRAN. It's not a good analogy.
- gpderetta 4y ago
  And people still write FORTRAN today.
  - TchoBeer 4y ago
    Because Fortran is still top of its class at number crunching
  - jcelerier 4y ago
    Hell, the school I've been to has one of its curriculums still centered around Fortran - people come out of here and it's their primary language (and they've got no issues finding jobs at all)
still_grokking 4y ago
> Legacy systems die due to business failure. You mean like in the case of COBOL? ;-) OK, admitted, banks can't fail. They're protected by law of nature. (Or something like that).
j1elo 4y ago
Yeah, I agree with you. Note I'm a C++ dev who would like to see less of C++ and more of newer languages that have improved upon mistakes of previous ones. But my opinion is that C++ will remain king for a long time in those niches where it has established itself.