3 ms·
C++'s problem isn't that it stopped breaking stuff. C++'s problem, or as I like to call it, Katamari Dama-C++, is that it needed to freeze a long time ago and t
by jerf 3y ago
C++'s problem isn't that it stopped breaking stuff. C++'s problem, or as I like to call it, Katamari Dama-C++, is that it needed to freeze a long time ago and they just needed to build a new language. They're exactly who I am thinking of in terms of just making a new language.
By language scales, Rust is exploding on to the scene and eating C++'s lunch precisely because they won't stop mucking with it. You might say that in absolute terms Rust is still not that much code and that's true, but in terms of how languages tend to turn over Rust is blowing C++ away. Much faster than the usual such process.
There are other languages that just need to accept that they are what they are and that endlessly adding features is only making their situation worse. Looking at you, Python. The community should just have accepted that Python can not be multithreaded and it doesn't have a good async solution, and people who needed these things should have started moving to other languages for solutions to those problems, instead of accreting an ever-increasing bunch of features flailing about trying to solve these deep, fundamental problems, and convincing a whole bunch of people that if they just hang on for another year, 3 years, 5 years, maybe a bit longer, Python will someday solve their problem. Now they're years into that process and they'd have been better off just switching years ago instead of being on an increasingly complicated language, and Python would have been better off being a good Python instead of trying to chase the kids.
- lenocinor 3y agoPython seems closer to the GIL being optional than it’s ever been before: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/the-python-gil-past-present-and-future/ https://www.backblaze.com/blog/the-python-gil-past-present-a... I was surprised to read this myself.