6 ms·

I've been working with C++ at my job for 2.5 years now and I've already come to this conclusion. Wouldn't wanna use it if there is any other way. The fact that

I've been working with C++ at my job for 2.5 years now and I've already come to this conclusion. Wouldn't wanna use it if there is any other way. The fact that you can do almost anything IS pretty cool, but without having at least one C++ wizard at hand it can drive you nuts.

ryandrake 2y ago
Just another person’s opinion: I’ve been using C++ for my entire career, and to be honest, if I’m starting a new solo project, I reach for it unless there is some major technical reason not to. Yes, it can be messy. Yes, there are footguns. But as a developer, you have the power to keep it clean and not shoot the footguns, so I’m still ok with the language. If I was starting a new work project with a lot of junior team members, or if I was doing a web project, or a very simple script, fine I’ll use a different language. There can definitely be good reasons not to use C++. But I’m at the point in my expertise that I will default to C++ otherwise. I’m most productive where I am most familiar.
- kmoser 2y ago
  > Yes, there are footguns. But as a developer, you have the power to keep it clean and not shoot the footguns, so I’m still ok with the language. With all due respect to your expertise, the whole idea of a footgun is that it tends to go off accidentally. The more footguns a language contains, the more likely you are of accidentally firing one.
  - jeffbee 2y ago
    I think what he's saying is that C++ users don't need to go to the Footgun Outlet Mall and wantonly brandish each of their credit cards. You can leave the subtle parts of the language on the shelf, in many cases.
- 725686 2y ago
  "you have the power to keep it clean and not shoot the footguns". Really? Do you think footguns are intentionally shot?
  - bee_rider 2y ago
    What even is a footgun supposed to be? The analogy doesn’t really make sense, in that… I mean the first thing anybody learns about guns is that they are “always loaded” (even when you know they aren’t) and you only point them at things you want shot. Is a footgun a gun that only aims at feet? Because that seems like a dumb thing to invent in the first place. Or is it a gun that happens a to be aiming at feet? That seems like something that could only exist by user error. I think “enough rope to hang yourself” is a more accurate description of almost every programming languages, since rope is at least intended to be useful (although it is a bit more morbid of an analogy).
    - rmwaite 2y ago
      Imagine that you had a gun and one of the features of the gun was that if you had sunglasses on and something in your left pocket, holstering the gun would cause it to immediately fire. You could argue that the gun shouldn’t behave this way, but it’s also possible that others are dependent on this behavior and you can’t remove it. This is a footgun - the way to avoid the holster firing is to simply not wear sunglasses, or keep something in your left pocket, and then it would never fire. But the problem is that both of those things are extremely common (for good reason). It’s a poorly thought out feature because it has severe consequences (potentially shooting your foot) for extremely common situations (wearing sunglasses and using your left pocket).
      - bee_rider 2y ago
        I basically don’t agree that anybody could depend on this holstering-causes-it-to-fire behavior. Or at least, their use-case requires design compromises that are so unthinkably ridiculous as to make the gun they want something that no reasonable person without that use-case would use. It is possible that the entire field of programming is full of ridiculous people. But it seems more likely that C++ is like a gun with no safety, or something along those lines.
        AnthonyMouse 2y ago
- alex_lav 2y ago
  > I’ve been using C++ for my entire career, and to be honest, if I’m starting a new solo project, I reach for it This is “I use the language I always use because I always use it”, and not actually a praise or C++ specifically.
  - sqeaky 2y ago
    Presumably "entire career" means some amount of exposure to other things. In my 21 years coding professionally, I will settle on C++ or Ruby for most problems depending on context. Ruby for quick, dirty, and "now!", while I use C++ for Long lasting, performance, strongly typed, and compatible things. Those aren't perfect categories and there are reasons to pick other tools, but Choosing C++ after a long career does mean something more than "I am comfortable with this".
    - alex_lav 2y ago
      > Choosing C++ after a long career does mean something more than "I am comfortable with this Does it?
      - sqeaky 2y ago
        Yes, feel free to re-read the all the rest of the comment where share a little bit of experience, and try to understand that people other than you have experience.
        alex_lav 2y ago
        I did, it was yet another “I use it because I always use it” post, but longer. Absolutely 0 value. But if you’re going to behave like a child I’ll skip the rest. Enjoy!
        sqeaky 2y ago
        Thank you for agreeing to leave the discourse. It it shall be much improved through your action.
philsnow 2y ago
I don’t think I’ve ever gotten paid for a line of c++ but Google has a “style guide” for internal c++ code that omits something like 3/4 of the language, and people seemed pretty happy with it overall. Maybe not “happy” but “grudgingly accepting because it beats the Wild West alternative”.
- fsckboy 2y ago
  is google's "internal" style guide this? https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html
  - JasonSage 2y ago
    Nit: parent didn't call it an internal style guide, but a style guide for their internal C++. (I'm sure it is.)
    - fsckboy 2y ago
      Nit nit: I don't accept your quibble, I think my usage was well within English usage standards; I even put "internal" in quotes! Consider this hypothetical conversation: "Is the style guide they use for internal projects the same as this style guide that they have published externally?" "could you clarify which ones you're talking about?" "Is the internal style guide you described the same as this one I found in google's account on github?" "oh, I see what you mean" will you send your second, or shall we simply pistols-at-dawn?
      - Maxatar 2y ago
        >"Is the style guide they use for internal projects the same as this style guide that they have published externally?" Consider that the style guide that AirBnB uses for internal projects is not the same as the style guide they publish externally, and you can sympathize with why the distinction matters :P.
        2y ago

ryandrake 2y ago

Just another person’s opinion: I’ve been using C++ for my entire career, and to be honest, if I’m starting a new solo project, I reach for it unless there is some major technical reason not to. Yes, it can be messy. Yes, there are footguns. But as a developer, you have the power to keep it clean and not shoot the footguns, so I’m still ok with the language. If I was starting a new work project with a lot of junior team members, or if I was doing a web project, or a very simple script, fine I’ll use a different language. There can definitely be good reasons not to use C++. But I’m at the point in my expertise that I will default to C++ otherwise. I’m most productive where I am most familiar.

kmoser 2y ago
> Yes, there are footguns. But as a developer, you have the power to keep it clean and not shoot the footguns, so I’m still ok with the language. With all due respect to your expertise, the whole idea of a footgun is that it tends to go off accidentally. The more footguns a language contains, the more likely you are of accidentally firing one.
- jeffbee 2y ago
  I think what he's saying is that C++ users don't need to go to the Footgun Outlet Mall and wantonly brandish each of their credit cards. You can leave the subtle parts of the language on the shelf, in many cases.
725686 2y ago
"you have the power to keep it clean and not shoot the footguns". Really? Do you think footguns are intentionally shot?
- bee_rider 2y ago
  What even is a footgun supposed to be? The analogy doesn’t really make sense, in that… I mean the first thing anybody learns about guns is that they are “always loaded” (even when you know they aren’t) and you only point them at things you want shot. Is a footgun a gun that only aims at feet? Because that seems like a dumb thing to invent in the first place. Or is it a gun that happens a to be aiming at feet? That seems like something that could only exist by user error. I think “enough rope to hang yourself” is a more accurate description of almost every programming languages, since rope is at least intended to be useful (although it is a bit more morbid of an analogy).
  - rmwaite 2y ago
    Imagine that you had a gun and one of the features of the gun was that if you had sunglasses on and something in your left pocket, holstering the gun would cause it to immediately fire. You could argue that the gun shouldn’t behave this way, but it’s also possible that others are dependent on this behavior and you can’t remove it. This is a footgun - the way to avoid the holster firing is to simply not wear sunglasses, or keep something in your left pocket, and then it would never fire. But the problem is that both of those things are extremely common (for good reason). It’s a poorly thought out feature because it has severe consequences (potentially shooting your foot) for extremely common situations (wearing sunglasses and using your left pocket).
    - bee_rider 2y ago
      I basically don’t agree that anybody could depend on this holstering-causes-it-to-fire behavior. Or at least, their use-case requires design compromises that are so unthinkably ridiculous as to make the gun they want something that no reasonable person without that use-case would use. It is possible that the entire field of programming is full of ridiculous people. But it seems more likely that C++ is like a gun with no safety, or something along those lines.
      - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
alex_lav 2y ago
> I’ve been using C++ for my entire career, and to be honest, if I’m starting a new solo project, I reach for it This is “I use the language I always use because I always use it”, and not actually a praise or C++ specifically.
- sqeaky 2y ago
  Presumably "entire career" means some amount of exposure to other things. In my 21 years coding professionally, I will settle on C++ or Ruby for most problems depending on context. Ruby for quick, dirty, and "now!", while I use C++ for Long lasting, performance, strongly typed, and compatible things. Those aren't perfect categories and there are reasons to pick other tools, but Choosing C++ after a long career does mean something more than "I am comfortable with this".
  - alex_lav 2y ago
    > Choosing C++ after a long career does mean something more than "I am comfortable with this Does it?
    - sqeaky 2y ago
      Yes, feel free to re-read the all the rest of the comment where share a little bit of experience, and try to understand that people other than you have experience.
      - alex_lav 2y ago
        I did, it was yet another “I use it because I always use it” post, but longer. Absolutely 0 value. But if you’re going to behave like a child I’ll skip the rest. Enjoy!
        sqeaky 2y ago
        Thank you for agreeing to leave the discourse. It it shall be much improved through your action.

philsnow 2y ago

I don’t think I’ve ever gotten paid for a line of c++ but Google has a “style guide” for internal c++ code that omits something like 3/4 of the language, and people seemed pretty happy with it overall. Maybe not “happy” but “grudgingly accepting because it beats the Wild West alternative”.

fsckboy 2y ago
is google's "internal" style guide this? https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html
- JasonSage 2y ago
  Nit: parent didn't call it an internal style guide, but a style guide for their internal C++. (I'm sure it is.)
  - fsckboy 2y ago
    Nit nit: I don't accept your quibble, I think my usage was well within English usage standards; I even put "internal" in quotes! Consider this hypothetical conversation: "Is the style guide they use for internal projects the same as this style guide that they have published externally?" "could you clarify which ones you're talking about?" "Is the internal style guide you described the same as this one I found in google's account on github?" "oh, I see what you mean" will you send your second, or shall we simply pistols-at-dawn?
    - Maxatar 2y ago
      >"Is the style guide they use for internal projects the same as this style guide that they have published externally?" Consider that the style guide that AirBnB uses for internal projects is not the same as the style guide they publish externally, and you can sympathize with why the distinction matters :P.
      - 2y ago