5 ms·

I'm curious, if you can get things done more quickly in Go, why do you feel C++ is generally a better choice? Performance?

by pivo 14y ago

shanelja 14y ago
Performance, I also feel more in control, it's hard to describe the feeling, it's just as though Go is providing an abstracted interface to the hardware, where as C++ provides raw, unfiltered but potentially dangerous access. Perhaps it's just my personal experience though.
- vanderZwan 14y ago
  That kind of fits Rob Pike's explanation for why Go isn't more popular with C++ programmers (although he gave it a negative spin). In a neutral way, it's like: if you spent all that effort mastering this language to get such fine-grained control, why would you give that up again? And really, I understand: why would you give that up? Especially if you know how to use C++ in a fairly painless way.
  - shanelja 14y ago
    Do you have a link to that? I would be interested to read it. I also couldn't agree more, but normally, people retort with the Hammer and Screwdriver argument.
    - mseepgood 14y ago
      http://commandcenter.blogspot.de/2012/06/less-is-exponentially-more.html http://commandcenter.blogspot.de/2012/06/less-is-exponential...
- eru 14y ago
  > where as C++ provides raw, unfiltered but potentially dangerous access. Wouldn't that be assembly? Last time I heard Stroustrup, he was all raving about abstractions, not raw unfiltered access.
- pjmlp 14y ago
  > Performance, I also feel more in control, it's hard to describe the feeling, it's just as though Go is providing an abstracted interface to the hardware, where as C++ provides raw, unfiltered but potentially dangerous access. Funny I though C++ did exactly the same thing. Where are the L1, L2 and L3 caches references, multiple opcode execution pipelines, processor instructions ?
jlarocco 14y ago
For me, I just don't see enough benefits of Go over C++. I already know how to use C++ in a way that avoids or mitigates the problems Go solves. With C++11 support starting to take off Go's advantages are even smaller. On the other hand, if I didn't know C++ and I was looking for a native compiled language to learn, I'd probably choose Go over C++.
- abraininavat 14y ago
  Depending on what you're doing, the libraries make a giant difference. Look over Go's standard library packages and then imagine what a pain in the ass it would be to find and manage all the separate C/C++ libs it would take to replicate all that functionality (or to write it yourself).
pjmlp 14y ago
Generic code?

I'm curious, if you can get things done more quickly in Go, why do you feel C++ is generally a better choice? Performance?

by pivo 14y ago

I'm curious, if you can get things done more quickly in Go, why do you feel C++ is generally a better choice? Performance?

shanelja 14y ago

Performance, I also feel more in control, it's hard to describe the feeling, it's just as though Go is providing an abstracted interface to the hardware, where as C++ provides raw, unfiltered but potentially dangerous access. Perhaps it's just my personal experience though.

vanderZwan 14y ago
That kind of fits Rob Pike's explanation for why Go isn't more popular with C++ programmers (although he gave it a negative spin). In a neutral way, it's like: if you spent all that effort mastering this language to get such fine-grained control, why would you give that up again? And really, I understand: why would you give that up? Especially if you know how to use C++ in a fairly painless way.
- shanelja 14y ago
  Do you have a link to that? I would be interested to read it. I also couldn't agree more, but normally, people retort with the Hammer and Screwdriver argument.
  - mseepgood 14y ago
    http://commandcenter.blogspot.de/2012/06/less-is-exponentially-more.html http://commandcenter.blogspot.de/2012/06/less-is-exponential...
eru 14y ago
> where as C++ provides raw, unfiltered but potentially dangerous access. Wouldn't that be assembly? Last time I heard Stroustrup, he was all raving about abstractions, not raw unfiltered access.
pjmlp 14y ago
> Performance, I also feel more in control, it's hard to describe the feeling, it's just as though Go is providing an abstracted interface to the hardware, where as C++ provides raw, unfiltered but potentially dangerous access. Funny I though C++ did exactly the same thing. Where are the L1, L2 and L3 caches references, multiple opcode execution pipelines, processor instructions ?

jlarocco 14y ago

For me, I just don't see enough benefits of Go over C++. I already know how to use C++ in a way that avoids or mitigates the problems Go solves. With C++11 support starting to take off Go's advantages are even smaller. On the other hand, if I didn't know C++ and I was looking for a native compiled language to learn, I'd probably choose Go over C++.

abraininavat 14y ago
Depending on what you're doing, the libraries make a giant difference. Look over Go's standard library packages and then imagine what a pain in the ass it would be to find and manage all the separate C/C++ libs it would take to replicate all that functionality (or to write it yourself).

pjmlp 14y ago

Generic code?