Linked by David Adams on Sat 11th Oct 2008 16:48 UTC, submitted by IndigoJo
General Development Eric Raymond is working on an essay, putatively titled "Why C++ Is Not My Favorite Programming Language". In his announcement, he calls it "an overcomplexity generator", "bloated, obfuscated, unwieldy, rigid, and brittle", and alleges that these characteristics appear in C++ applications also. I contend that many of the complaints about C++ are petty or are aimed at specific libraries or poor documentation and that many of the features commonly regarded as unnecessary (and excluded from intended replacements) are, in fact, highly useful. C++: the Ugly Useful Programming Language
Permalink for comment 333605
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The declined use of C++
by moondevil on Tue 14th Oct 2008 11:49 UTC
Member since:

I was wondering if I should still contribute to this thread but in the end I could not contain myself.

First of all, lets say that there are still lots of places where using C++ makes sense. Specially on the games area, number crunching applications, and constrained resource environments, to name a few.

But on the day to day applications of the IT industry, C++ role has long been replaced by Java and C#.

Like it or not, these languages allow for better productivity and are fast enough for many applications.

And they are not interpreted. On C#'s case the bytecodes are always compiled before execution. On Java's case it is a mix of compilation and interpretation depending on the method call count threshold.

On the telecomunications industry, where I work, there are network elements, where the software is Java based with the JVM running directly on the hardware.

The C++ build model is pre-historic with all the include files and explicit compile/link phases.

Splitting class declaration/definitions in two files
also does not make much sense nowadays. The C# separate class model is a better one.

Several years ago IBM tried to sort out the problem with Visual Age for C++, but this was long ago.

We are in 2008, on the verge of having C++0x approved and I am not aware of a single 100% AnsiC++ 98 standard compliant compiler.

And all the comments about boost, Qt, wxWidgets are good, but useless if your company does not agree with their usage, or they do not support your target environment.

So C++ is still an important language, but stop trying to portrait modern C++ as a no problems language that everyone would easily pick up.

Reply Score: 1