3 ms·
I've only worked in tech for a decade but I remember seeing this back then, and can find articles two decades ago about the same thing. There's just so much cod
by eddsh1994 4y ago
I've only worked in tech for a decade but I remember seeing this back then, and can find articles two decades ago about the same thing. There's just so much code in C++ that can't be re-written or can be re-written but will take hundreds of developer years. For example Rust doesn't even have a spec. I don't think I could use Rust for regulated healthcare/defense fields? There's not really that much support in hardware for Rust in robotics. If something works in banking why risk moving to Rust? Etc... I think Rust has a place but right now I'd wager a C++ code base is worked on way after the last Rust code base has been created.
- spoiler 4y agoRight, you're absolutely correct that C++ is currently the defacto standard (or maybe not even just defacto) in those fields. I have a lot of opinions on the situation. Some are on technical merits, some boil down to humans doing human things. It's difficult for me to give C++ much credit on that front due to the fact it's had such an incredibly long head start and tremendous amount of effort put into it. Similar efforts exist for Rust now, but they're only starting. Maybe something better than Rust comes along eventually too. I'm not married to Rust. That doesn't mean I'll want Rust to fail or disappear. It just means there will be more choices. I'm just not going to let my tools hold me back. Same goes for the C++ and Rust situation currently. Also, it's possible that it's just a quirk of preference. Some people prefer mangoes to pineapple, some are the opposite.