3 ms·
No, UncleOxidant, it is definitely not "especially true for C++". There are plenty of powerful languages out there, many with more subtleties than C++, and lon
by robin_bb 17y ago
No, UncleOxidant, it is definitely not "especially true for C++". There are plenty of powerful languages out there, many with more subtleties than C++, and longer roads to mastery.
No one disputes that C++ has a long road to mastery, but there are plenty of other languages for which that is true. So, C++ is not special in that way.
- shrughes 17y agoWhat languages do you have in mind?
- plinkplonk 17y agoHaskell probably has a long road to mastery. That said I think it might still be shorter than that for C++. it is hard to think of a language that takes longer than c++ to master. Interesting!
- robin_bb 17y agoI disagree. Haskell is more difficult to master. There's far more to it than C++. I am highly proficient in both languages, it so happens.
- plinkplonk 17y ago"I disagree. Haskell is more difficult to master" Fair enough. I found haskell easier than c++ to grok. It may have helped that I had a good grasp on type theory before I learned Haskell (worked through TAPL a few years ago). Subjectively, I found the various components of Haskell almost always fit together in very logical fashion with a very clean syntax, while C++ felt arbitrary, (with exceptions to every rule and exceptions to those exceptions and exceptions to those). I share your intent of not starting a language war. Just expressing my experience.
- robin_bb 17y agoOf course, there can be no objective measure easily made, and I do not want to engage in language wars. That said, I am a C++ expert, but contend that each of Lisp, Haskell, and Scala are far deeper languages, with more involved in their mastery than C++.