Comments on: Why I Dislike C++

By: Guest

Guest — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 19:53:03 +0000

In your dreams. Other than (unproven) academic credentials that are worth nothing in the world of coding, your prose brings no hard facts.

So much for the pertinence of your 'reply'.

By: dasir

dasir — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 19:44:46 +0000

yes, I agree with you …
C++ sucks :-D

By: ivag

ivag — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:43:29 +0000

As I can see you did not learn C++ in Minnesota. For me that is the only explanation for what you said heare. I am C and C++ programer for a long time and when I have to debug some C code I have a migraine. For instance in C code I found situations where GOTO function is the only way to do something easy (and to kill the functionality of the code as well). Because of that for the last 2 years my job is translating C code in C++ in science institute I am workin at. We calculated that it is much cheaper to translate all the software to C++ then to maintain C code.
Debuging C code larger then 1000 lines is harder then writing all code from the begining. I have no problem with debuging C++ code larger then 30000 lines that I did not write.

By: PierreGau

PierreGau — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:37:21 +0000

The current trend is Web Applications (PHP is seen as 'sexy').

But plain-old C can bring one thing or two in this area:

TrustLeap G-WAN is a Web Application Server which is faster (in user-mode) than IIS 7.0 (in the kernel).

G-WAN ANSI C89 ('edit & play') scripts are 5x faster than ASP.Net C#.

G-WAN C scripts are 120x faster than PHP.

G-WAN is up to 38x faster than Apache.
G-WAN is up to 25x faster than Nginx.

One of the reasons CPUs sold well was bloated code.

No longer: with the CPU frequency halt, inefficient code will not longer scale on new CPUs because by using more Cores they are more powerful, but not faster, see:

http://trustleap.ch/en_scalability.html

So, whether the world (including youngs) will learn how to code properly or, well, they will have to buy twice as much servers to make their Web Applications work twice faster.

Just adding CPUs (or CPU Cores) is a much less expensive proposition.

As a result, skilled C programmers have a bright future: the 'sexy' PHP will not survive without C.

By: PierreGau

PierreGau — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 04:37:21 +0000

By: Noogie

Noogie — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 01:51:31 +0000

I "regressed" from c++ to c. But really its progress. I really just can't stand c++ anymore.

And it's not just the language, but the people that use it. It's like talking to cult-members. I'm sure they'd all fellate BS if he walked in the room.

I've been doing some googling about it just to know I'm not the only one, and found your diary..but also some nice quotes:

http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/c++/

By: Noogie

Noogie — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 19:51:31 +0000

By: Rio

Rio — Fri, 23 May 2008 13:31:57 +0000

Hi Dudes… you are completely beginner. NASA used C++ in one of their rover. Again it is C++ , not phyton nor c. Please open your eyes and mind. Good things are always hard to understand.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:47:57 +0000

C++ is a POS. Bjarne should do something constructive with his life.

By: i80and

i80and — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:36:11 +0000

Thanks for the feedback, Wolfgang. I will agree that my knowledge of C++ is less than what would be optimal for critiquing it.

C++ does indeed have more features than C or Python. I question whether these features actually help it or not, however.

If you understand the error messages, good for you. Personally, I have better things to do than read a page or two of template errors for a trivial glitch when a single line would tell me just as much >90% of the time.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I’m not talking about beauty in the code, however (although I think that the abstractions that C++ allows can be more trouble than they’re worth); I’m talking about the actual syntax of the language itself. I’m sure once you see it enough times, it looks fine. But I like the K.I.S.S. rule when applied to languages; the syntax of the language itself should be minimal and just enough to perform the required task. Python has a much simpler method of operator overloading, for example (although it isn’t an optimal comparison as Python doesn’t have static types).

Again, thanks for the comment. You probably do have more experience with C++ than I do, and therefore you probably are more qualified to discuss the topic than I am. I’m just remarking on my thoughts on the matter, with some quotes thrown in for good measure. In the end, the language you like is more a matter of taste than anything else. If you like C++, then that’s great. More power to you.