4 ms·
When you said simpler, I hoped you'd be advocating less abstraction. Anyway, opinions on C++ largely depend on what kind of software you're developing. If you'r
by uonyechi 14y ago
When you said simpler, I hoped you'd be advocating less abstraction. Anyway, opinions on C++ largely depend on what kind of software you're developing. If you're not writing high-performance apps, there are more productive than languanges than C++. Otherwise, less abstraction is absolutely neccessary especially for memory management. So C++11 has no choice but to remain as feature rich as it is. You should have to pick what features to work it.
- eriksank 14y agoThe problem is that C wipes the floor with C++ in high-performance apps, while any scripting engine wipes the floor with C++ in terms of abstraction. C++ is simply losing the war to the combination of C with scripting.
- SomeCallMeTim 14y agoC++ is identical in speed to C, if you know what you're doing, even if you're using "advanced" features. The only thing C exceeds C++ in is simplicity. Yes you CAN write slow code in C++, but if you need speed, it's there. In the parts of your code where speed isn't AS important, but you're not ready to drop to a scripting language, you can manipulate things with higher-level structures and smart pointers and such. C++ plus scripting is the best way to go, IMO; you get object-oriented abstractions, better type safety at compile time, and yet you still get speed. Destructors alone make it worth using C++ over C, so you can ensure stack structures clean up on return from a function and can avoid using a "goto exit" model. And if you need every last percent of speed, you can write that code in a "C" subset of C++. C is still completely there under the covers. Except you have to do more casting. C is really not much better than a portable assembly language. And I should know, having written commercial games entirely in assembly language.