Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 21st Sep 2010 21:32 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Qt After many months of designing, coding, reviewing, testing and documenting, Qt 4.7.0 is finally ready for the big time. Although it's a little more than nine months since Qt's last feature release (4.6.0 on December 1, 2009), the seeds of some of the new stuff in 4.7 were sown much earlier. Indeed, many of the ideas behind the biggest new feature in Qt 4.7.0, Qt Quick, were born more than two years ago, not long after Qt 4.4 was released
Thread beginning with comment 442300
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
siride
Member since:
2006-01-02

Read the C++ FQA. It's not just beginner mistakes. The language is fundamentally *nasty*.

I've also done C for quite some time. I've done assembly. I even wrote my own assembler and my own virtual machine. I've done C++, Java, Perl, PHP, C# and, sigh, even VBA. I have books on operating system kernels and how the computer works on a low-level. I've taken classes in that stuff. Believe me, I'm not just saying this because I don't get pointers. I get pointers. I can deal with C++, but it's such a fscking pain and the more I use other languages, the more I find them to be considerably superior except in the performance/memory-usage department. Better, though, is to write most of your app in a managed language and write the performance critical core in C++ or another unmanaged language.

Reply Parent Score: 3

turrini Member since:
2006-10-31

C/C++ aren't nasty. They are flexible.

Programmers who can't stand flexibility, should never try C/C++, so they would never say that C is horrible or difficult.

People often say that something is horrible or not feasible when they do not understand.

We, C/C++ programmers, are very happy with our language. It's flexible, blazing fast, cientific and fantastic.

I do business programming for living too. And I code in C++.

C/C++. They fits our needs.

Reply Parent Score: 2

siride Member since:
2006-01-02

Please don't lump C in with C++. C is a small, relatively clean, efficient and well-defined language. C++ is an ungodly monster of hacks, special cases, unclear or non-decidable semantics, weird parse requirements and non-obvious syntax.

Reply Parent Score: 2

axilmar Member since:
2006-03-20

Better, though, is to write most of your app in a managed language and write the performance critical core in C++ or another unmanaged language.


Why waste time on going back and forth between two languages? it's counter productive.

Using a managed language when it's not required it's also a waste of resources.

Reply Parent Score: 2

siride Member since:
2006-01-02

It's entirely the opposite of counter-productive. I know Java's JNI isn't the cleanest, but in .NET, you have to do almost nothing to have managed code call unmanaged code. The framework does all the work for you. Furthermore, it's equivalent to using assembly to write your inner loops inside an otherwise C or C++ program. That's considerably more tedious, yet I doubt you'd complain.

Using C++, and its ridiculous semantics, manual memory management and long compile times is also a waste of resources (especially programmer resources) when you can use a managed language that has learned from the mistakes of C++. They really aren't slow (they are JITted) and they don't actually use that much memory. Unless you are doing embedded programming, the cost is pretty minimal.

Reply Parent Score: 2