To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To say "every language has its place" is almost tautological. The question isn't "does every language have a place", but "how big is the place for every language?" Moreover, the original statement is certainly no basis for the conclusion that one cannot argue that one language is objectively better than another.
Ultimately, a language is a tool. Tools can be compared, not just for specific tasks, but in general. Very few people would argue that a silicon-carbide drill bit isn't better than a regular steel one. A steel one will serve you just fine for making holes in cherry, but the silicon-carbide bit is "better" using objective metrics.
The metrics are what's important. The problem with most proponents of C or C++ is that their metrics are skewed. The only two metrics by which either of these languages will win comparisons are either performance-dominated ones or ones dominated by questions of cross-language compatibility. Moreover, even the performance-dominated metrics must be qualified to include "highly-tweeked" performance, because in many cases the fact that higher-level languages make it easier to implement fast (and therefore usually complex algorithms), offset their constant factor performance-losses. This wrinkle cannot be underestimated. It is precisely the reason that there exists massive amounts of slow software programmed in supposedly "fast" languages. For the vast majority of tasks (with games possibly being a genuine exception), a metric of this nature is unrealistic. Most software (remember, 90% of software is never shrink-wrapped!) doesn't care about constant factor performance losses. It's usually important, but usually, time-to-market, development cost, ease of maintainence, etc, rank higher.
The mentality of "only speed matters" is fading, and good riddence to it. It has dominated the industry for far too long. If your average C/C++ programmer designed airplanes, a 777 would go at Mach 6, but have a range of 1000 miles and cost a billion dollars per flight to operate!
The mentality of "only speed matters" is fading, and good riddence to it. It has dominated the industry for far too long. If your average C/C++ programmer designed airplanes, a 777 would go at Mach 6, but have a range of 1000 miles and cost a billion dollars per flight to operate!
Reminds me of how much it cost to fly to the moon.
But I ask you this, name one single language that is better than C++ for writing games in? This is assuming that you want the current or next level of graphics speeds.




Member since:
2005-07-07
In Game Programming C++ is now considered the standard language to use. True many games have scripting languages built into them (mainly this helps the development process, it means that designers can use the script without bothering the programmers too much) but the bulk of a game is still in C++. Why is this? Because there is nothing better out there for Games. Nothing is advanced enough, fast enough and mature enough. Every language has its place, anyone who argues that one language is better than another is ignorant.