3 ms·
He's not arguing against C++, he's arguing against abstraction. It's the silliest part of his essay. No; as the snippet you quoted already makes clear, he's ar
by gruseom 17y ago
He's not arguing against C++, he's arguing against abstraction. It's the silliest part of his essay.
No; as the snippet you quoted already makes clear, he's arguing against inefficient abstraction, which I take to mean abstraction that introduces bottlenecks into a program and is hard to change without rewriting the program. That is a very real problem and not silly at all.
- thras 17y agoRe-read it, he says that you only discover the inefficiency 2 years in. Yes, I'm sure that he's for perfect abstraction, as is everybody else. But he seems to be arguing against real-world abstraction which is what we've got. All abstraction introduces inefficiencies. There is no magic bullet.
- lallysingh 17y agoFor all its faults, efficient abstraction is one of C++'s strongest suites. A small subset of the STL written for the kernel would do wonders (e.g. vector and list).