5 ms·

I see this article as a battle plan. If we want to rid the world of C++ (and we as the programmers community certainly should in my opinion) it has to be done b

by tinco 14y ago

I see this article as a battle plan. If we want to rid the world of C++ (and we as the programmers community certainly should in my opinion) it has to be done by building a language/platform that addresses the needs of the software mentioned. Looking at the graph it amazes me Microsoft has not tried to tackle this more directly. C# and Haskell only attack the application level, why was there never an effort from them to improve the system level?

skurmedel 14y ago
Invent a good alternative then. There are reasons why you don't run Haskell in a fighter jet. And you can certainly write crappy Haskell too. It is hip to shit on C++, I get it. But for some types of software there is not a good alternative.
- hermanhermitage 14y ago
  Sorry... Fat finger trade - I accidentally downvoted you instead of up (not sure how to revert it) Pity the down vote isn't on the far right of the heading.
  - unimpressive 14y ago
    You can't revert it, I have remedied the situation by giving the grandparent an upvote. It was a deserving comment anyway.
- tinco 14y ago
  I fully agree it is quite easy and maybe even too easy to write crappy Haskell but that is completely beside the point. I don't shit on C++ because that is a hip thing to do, whatever that means. C++ is still used in some fields, and obviously C# and Haskell (and by extension all modern languages) suck for those fields. I think C++ was a bad idea from the start, because it attempts to be a strict superset of C, which is like trying to win a race while being tied to the current front runner. It might have allowed C++ to use the rope to get in front, but now its in front it just drags the language down. I am trying to invent a good alternative, but obviously that is easier said than done. I like to talk about it openly and provocatively so others who are more qualified to do it might jump in and try too.
  - skurmedel 14y ago
    It is by no means perfect. But I think some parts of C++ is quite clever too. Templates might allow horrible code, but every time you write a container type in C or Go, you wish you had them.
- smosher 14y ago
  > But for some types of software there is not a good alternative. This is exactly it. As much as many people dislike C++, not having it at all would be very bad for some areas. Users of the next major systems language should regard C++ in much the same way as (willing) users of C++ regard C. The takeaway here should be about how much better the future can be, not how bad the present looks. The former is hopefully much less controversial than the latter.
JanneVee 14y ago
Why should all programmers try to get rid of C++? IMHO as the programming community should try to enhance the craft. To write better code irregardless of language(including C++).
- tinco 14y ago
  No I don't think that is how it works. Programmers enhance the craft by applying technologies (like C++) and finding their weak spots and correcting those with new tools. Enhancing your own craft has a ceiling (that of the technology), advancing technology has none.
  - JanneVee 14y ago
    I'm being pragmatic. One of the goals of the Go language is to be an alternative for C++. It has ended up an alternative to scripting languages and failing to attract the programmers who use C++ the most. http://commandcenter.blogspot.se/2012/06/less-is-exponentially-more.html http://commandcenter.blogspot.se/2012/06/less-is-exponential... So my question is the same: Why programmers should try to eradicate C++?
    - smosher 14y ago
      The question is highly controversial and (separately) not worth discussing. It's not your fault, it was more or less supplied that way by context. It works well as a rhetorical question, but some jackass is going to click "reply." Oh, wait. ;) Instead, let's consider this: Should we try to make C++ unnecessary? I think the answer is 'yes' and I don't think it's specific to C++. For all languages × all domains, I think the time should come that there is a fitting alternative language.
lccarrasco 14y ago
Would you mind explaining why do you think we should get rid of C++? Do you have the same opinion regarding C (since you talked about the system level)?
- tinco 14y ago
  Yes, C is 70's technology. That C++ is based off C is one of the reasons it is so bad. Problems range from compilation times to weird syntax choices to the complete lack of higher level constructs which C++ only barely makes up for.
frozenport 14y ago
MS put in an effort to improve the system level with their Singularity project (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_%28operating_system%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_%28operating_system...). I personally love C/C++, write my guile scripts in vim, and see no reason to replace it.
pnathan 14y ago
Right now the language I see as most positioned for serious work is the Mozilla Rust language. There have been a few stabs at a type-safe deterministic language- BitC and SystemC come to mind. Loosely, you're looking for a language where you can ensure that garbage collection won't happen and that assembly can be written. Those languages aren't popular these days. Then what's needed is some level of type safety and guarantees about efficient code generation. You should be able to reason quite well about the generated code. "No Magic" is the watchword of that land. Rust is targeting the next level up from kernels, i.e., system utilities and performant applications. It's not really intended to write kernels, but I think it can get there with some careful work. It should, IMO, do reasonably well on more powerful embedded systems based around typical OS models, e.g., the RasPI.
kybernetyk 14y ago
> rid the world of C++ Why? If you don't like it don't use it. There are enough people who are happy with C++ because it perfectly fits their domain.

by tinco 14y ago

skurmedel 14y ago

Invent a good alternative then. There are reasons why you don't run Haskell in a fighter jet. And you can certainly write crappy Haskell too. It is hip to shit on C++, I get it. But for some types of software there is not a good alternative.

hermanhermitage 14y ago
Sorry... Fat finger trade - I accidentally downvoted you instead of up (not sure how to revert it) Pity the down vote isn't on the far right of the heading.
- unimpressive 14y ago
  You can't revert it, I have remedied the situation by giving the grandparent an upvote. It was a deserving comment anyway.
tinco 14y ago
I fully agree it is quite easy and maybe even too easy to write crappy Haskell but that is completely beside the point. I don't shit on C++ because that is a hip thing to do, whatever that means. C++ is still used in some fields, and obviously C# and Haskell (and by extension all modern languages) suck for those fields. I think C++ was a bad idea from the start, because it attempts to be a strict superset of C, which is like trying to win a race while being tied to the current front runner. It might have allowed C++ to use the rope to get in front, but now its in front it just drags the language down. I am trying to invent a good alternative, but obviously that is easier said than done. I like to talk about it openly and provocatively so others who are more qualified to do it might jump in and try too.
- skurmedel 14y ago
  It is by no means perfect. But I think some parts of C++ is quite clever too. Templates might allow horrible code, but every time you write a container type in C or Go, you wish you had them.
smosher 14y ago
> But for some types of software there is not a good alternative. This is exactly it. As much as many people dislike C++, not having it at all would be very bad for some areas. Users of the next major systems language should regard C++ in much the same way as (willing) users of C++ regard C. The takeaway here should be about how much better the future can be, not how bad the present looks. The former is hopefully much less controversial than the latter.

JanneVee 14y ago

Why should all programmers try to get rid of C++? IMHO as the programming community should try to enhance the craft. To write better code irregardless of language(including C++).

tinco 14y ago
No I don't think that is how it works. Programmers enhance the craft by applying technologies (like C++) and finding their weak spots and correcting those with new tools. Enhancing your own craft has a ceiling (that of the technology), advancing technology has none.
- JanneVee 14y ago
  I'm being pragmatic. One of the goals of the Go language is to be an alternative for C++. It has ended up an alternative to scripting languages and failing to attract the programmers who use C++ the most. http://commandcenter.blogspot.se/2012/06/less-is-exponentially-more.html http://commandcenter.blogspot.se/2012/06/less-is-exponential... So my question is the same: Why programmers should try to eradicate C++?
  - smosher 14y ago
    The question is highly controversial and (separately) not worth discussing. It's not your fault, it was more or less supplied that way by context. It works well as a rhetorical question, but some jackass is going to click "reply." Oh, wait. ;) Instead, let's consider this: Should we try to make C++ unnecessary? I think the answer is 'yes' and I don't think it's specific to C++. For all languages × all domains, I think the time should come that there is a fitting alternative language.

lccarrasco 14y ago

Would you mind explaining why do you think we should get rid of C++? Do you have the same opinion regarding C (since you talked about the system level)?

tinco 14y ago
Yes, C is 70's technology. That C++ is based off C is one of the reasons it is so bad. Problems range from compilation times to weird syntax choices to the complete lack of higher level constructs which C++ only barely makes up for.

frozenport 14y ago

MS put in an effort to improve the system level with their Singularity project (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_%28operating_system%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_%28operating_system...). I personally love C/C++, write my guile scripts in vim, and see no reason to replace it.

pnathan 14y ago

Right now the language I see as most positioned for serious work is the Mozilla Rust language. There have been a few stabs at a type-safe deterministic language- BitC and SystemC come to mind. Loosely, you're looking for a language where you can ensure that garbage collection won't happen and that assembly can be written. Those languages aren't popular these days. Then what's needed is some level of type safety and guarantees about efficient code generation. You should be able to reason quite well about the generated code. "No Magic" is the watchword of that land. Rust is targeting the next level up from kernels, i.e., system utilities and performant applications. It's not really intended to write kernels, but I think it can get there with some careful work. It should, IMO, do reasonably well on more powerful embedded systems based around typical OS models, e.g., the RasPI.

kybernetyk 14y ago

> rid the world of C++ Why? If you don't like it don't use it. There are enough people who are happy with C++ because it perfectly fits their domain.