3 ms·

No. I'm not saying that C++ is not fit as a general purpose programming language. It very well may be. All I'm saying is that "adoption by millions is a test

• CuriousCosmic 3y ago
  "adoption of X is a testament that it is fit for purpose" and "adoption of X is a testament of truth" are two incredibly different things. The equivalent statement would be that "adoption by millions is a testament to the viability of X as a cohesive religion".
  • lisper 3y ago
    "Fitness as a general purpose programming language" is (at least in part) an objective claim. If a million people professed to believe that, say, brainfuck was fit as a general purpose programming language that in and of itself would not make it so. This is not the case for being a cohesive religion. If a million people profess to believe some religious belief, that in and of itself is sufficient for that belief to be a cohesive religion.
    • trealira 3y ago
      > If a million people professed to believe that, say, brainfuck was fit as a general purpose programming language that in and of itself would not make it so. No, but if millions of people actually did manage to use Brainfuck for general purpose programming, then that would be evidence that it really is fit as a general purpose programming language, even if it's not ideal. Brainfuck isn't in that position, hence no one thinks it's fit, but C++ is. People do use it for general purpose programming, even if their program could be rewritten in a garbage-collected language.