6 ms·

How to write good code with C++11

77 points by nqnielsen 15y ago

C++11 style talk by Bjarne Stroupstrup at the GoingNative

halayli 15y ago
I would really like to see Bjarne and Linus debating C++ & C.
- praptak 15y ago
  Me not really - Linus' critique of C++ had few points that could be rationally debated. A much better researched critique of C++ by Yossi Kreinin is here: http://yosefk.com/c++fqa/ http://yosefk.com/c++fqa/ And yeah, I'd much better like to see Kreinin than Linus in a C++ debate.
  - loup-vaillant 15y ago
    I personally enjoyed reading the FQA, and even learned about some C++ "subtleties" in the process. I note however that the FQA itself has its share of criticism. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3171647/errors-in-c-fqa http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3171647/errors-in-c-fqa
    - JoachimSchipper 15y ago
      When reading this rebuttal, keep in mind that it was written in 2010 while the FQA was written starting in 2007, and apparently based on the author's experiences with much older tools. All other things aside, if your compiler frequently miscompiles templates, using them is probably not a good idea.
      - loup-vaillant 15y ago
        I agree. Also, C++11 probably makes a good deal of the FQA less relevant (except with regards to the sheer complexity of the language). Also, I still agree with the basic premise of the FQA: for the majority of new projects where C++ is used, C++ is not the best tool for the job (not taking into account programmer expertise, though even then…).
  - TorKlingberg 15y ago
    Both would be interesting. The FQA is mostly criticizing C++ as compared to Java or C#, while Linus prefers C.
- ruediger 15y ago
  No. I'd rather like to see Linus talk about Linux (or git) and Bjarne talk about C++. That would be far more interesting than having them fight a flame war over such a silly issue as C vs. C++.
noj 15y ago
He's not really a natural speaker, but hopefully his points might go home if you look beyond that.
moonchrome 15y ago
Off topic - but I got to ask - what's up with Microsoft pushing C++ ? They were pushing .NET then all the sudden it's back to C++ (and JavaScript ?). Check out http://channel9.msdn.com/ http://channel9.msdn.com/, 5 out of ~9 videos about C++ on the front page. Meanwhile .NET projects like RX seem to be loosing steam, Silverlight is officially dead. I switched to JVM/Clojure so I haven't been following .NET/MS developments for the last year in detail, when did this push to native happen ? Even better question - why ? .NET finally got to a point where using C++/legacy was justified in niche areas, now they are pushing it to everything (desktop development with C++/WinRT ?) They could have picked up Mono after Novell, fund it separately (to avoid legal risks) and establish .NET as a truly cross-platform solution.
- krig 15y ago
  Hasn't Microsoft been switching technology completely all the time? They do seem incredibly fickle. Does anyone remember Avalon/WPF?
  - rvkennedy 15y ago
    Or, indeed, Silverlight. But big companies' big technology plays sometimes work, and sometimes don't. Sometimes you get lucky (like the people who never bothered to learn .NET). But I don't think that posting this video represents a major signifier of MS' current technology stance.
  - rrreese 15y ago
    WPF is used extensively for LOB apps in enterprise. It seems to have completely replaced windows forms except for legacy applications.
- philbo 15y ago
  I'm not sure that them pushing C++ equates to a switch away from .NET and managed code. What I take from it is that they're keen to foster a rich development eco-system on their platforms and they think that programming language diversity is an important part of this. As I write this, I realise there is a compelling counter-argument in Apple and Objective-C. So maybe not, I don't know.
johnx123-up 15y ago
I have no comments on C# as a language Bjarne Stroustrup's FAQ http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#Csharp http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#Csharp
powertower 15y ago
There are so many uninformed comments here about .NET, WPF, and C++ that I don’t know to which to respond. So let me just leave this here: 1. .NET Framework and Managed C# is the highest programming abstraction level in Windows, and is the way most Windows Apps are now written. 2. The underlining system of .NET is written in C++ and C. And hence is why Microsoft is supporting unmanaged C++. Because it's part of everything. 3. WPF/xaml hasn't died. It has replaced WinForms. And is #1 way UIs are now written. *This will all be complemented with the new Metro interface where JS/HTML5 are now also part of the top level.
corysama 15y ago
More presentations from the same event: http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/GoingNative-2012 http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/GoingNative-2012
queensnake 15y ago
MS knows that Moore's Law doesn't mean faster cores anymore, rather more of them. But, most problems are only so parallelizable, thus the need to get the utter maximum serial performance (and no less important, minimum power consumption) that you can, out of code. This and, speed advances are going to come in good part from GPU parallelism and, I doubt you're going to get that through the CLR. Herb Sutter, head of the C++ team is all over this -- http://herbsutter.com/welcome-to-the-jungle http://herbsutter.com/welcome-to-the-jungle. C++ and MS' emphasis on parallelism is them facing the future, as they should.

77 points by nqnielsen 15y ago

C++11 style talk by Bjarne Stroupstrup at the GoingNative

halayli 15y ago

I would really like to see Bjarne and Linus debating C++ & C.

praptak 15y ago
Me not really - Linus' critique of C++ had few points that could be rationally debated. A much better researched critique of C++ by Yossi Kreinin is here: http://yosefk.com/c++fqa/ http://yosefk.com/c++fqa/ And yeah, I'd much better like to see Kreinin than Linus in a C++ debate.
- loup-vaillant 15y ago
  I personally enjoyed reading the FQA, and even learned about some C++ "subtleties" in the process. I note however that the FQA itself has its share of criticism. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3171647/errors-in-c-fqa http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3171647/errors-in-c-fqa
  - JoachimSchipper 15y ago
    When reading this rebuttal, keep in mind that it was written in 2010 while the FQA was written starting in 2007, and apparently based on the author's experiences with much older tools. All other things aside, if your compiler frequently miscompiles templates, using them is probably not a good idea.
    - loup-vaillant 15y ago
      I agree. Also, C++11 probably makes a good deal of the FQA less relevant (except with regards to the sheer complexity of the language). Also, I still agree with the basic premise of the FQA: for the majority of new projects where C++ is used, C++ is not the best tool for the job (not taking into account programmer expertise, though even then…).
- TorKlingberg 15y ago
  Both would be interesting. The FQA is mostly criticizing C++ as compared to Java or C#, while Linus prefers C.
ruediger 15y ago
No. I'd rather like to see Linus talk about Linux (or git) and Bjarne talk about C++. That would be far more interesting than having them fight a flame war over such a silly issue as C vs. C++.

noj 15y ago

He's not really a natural speaker, but hopefully his points might go home if you look beyond that.

moonchrome 15y ago

Off topic - but I got to ask - what's up with Microsoft pushing C++ ? They were pushing .NET then all the sudden it's back to C++ (and JavaScript ?). Check out http://channel9.msdn.com/ http://channel9.msdn.com/, 5 out of ~9 videos about C++ on the front page. Meanwhile .NET projects like RX seem to be loosing steam, Silverlight is officially dead. I switched to JVM/Clojure so I haven't been following .NET/MS developments for the last year in detail, when did this push to native happen ? Even better question - why ? .NET finally got to a point where using C++/legacy was justified in niche areas, now they are pushing it to everything (desktop development with C++/WinRT ?) They could have picked up Mono after Novell, fund it separately (to avoid legal risks) and establish .NET as a truly cross-platform solution.

krig 15y ago
Hasn't Microsoft been switching technology completely all the time? They do seem incredibly fickle. Does anyone remember Avalon/WPF?
- rvkennedy 15y ago
  Or, indeed, Silverlight. But big companies' big technology plays sometimes work, and sometimes don't. Sometimes you get lucky (like the people who never bothered to learn .NET). But I don't think that posting this video represents a major signifier of MS' current technology stance.
- rrreese 15y ago
  WPF is used extensively for LOB apps in enterprise. It seems to have completely replaced windows forms except for legacy applications.
philbo 15y ago
I'm not sure that them pushing C++ equates to a switch away from .NET and managed code. What I take from it is that they're keen to foster a rich development eco-system on their platforms and they think that programming language diversity is an important part of this. As I write this, I realise there is a compelling counter-argument in Apple and Objective-C. So maybe not, I don't know.

johnx123-up 15y ago

I have no comments on C# as a language Bjarne Stroustrup's FAQ http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#Csharp http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#Csharp

powertower 15y ago

There are so many uninformed comments here about .NET, WPF, and C++ that I don’t know to which to respond. So let me just leave this here: 1. .NET Framework and Managed C# is the highest programming abstraction level in Windows, and is the way most Windows Apps are now written. 2. The underlining system of .NET is written in C++ and C. And hence is why Microsoft is supporting unmanaged C++. Because it's part of everything. 3. WPF/xaml hasn't died. It has replaced WinForms. And is #1 way UIs are now written. *This will all be complemented with the new Metro interface where JS/HTML5 are now also part of the top level.

corysama 15y ago

More presentations from the same event: http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/GoingNative-2012 http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/GoingNative-2012

queensnake 15y ago

MS knows that Moore's Law doesn't mean faster cores anymore, rather more of them. But, most problems are only so parallelizable, thus the need to get the utter maximum serial performance (and no less important, minimum power consumption) that you can, out of code. This and, speed advances are going to come in good part from GPU parallelism and, I doubt you're going to get that through the CLR. Herb Sutter, head of the C++ team is all over this -- http://herbsutter.com/welcome-to-the-jungle http://herbsutter.com/welcome-to-the-jungle. C++ and MS' emphasis on parallelism is them facing the future, as they should.