Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 28th Oct 2005 11:17 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Herb Sutter, a software architect from Microsoft, gave a speech yesterday at In-Stat/MDR's Fall Processor Forum. Addressing a crowd mostly consisting of hardware engineers, he talked about how the software world was ill-prepared to make use of the new multicore CPUs coming from Intel and AMD.
Thread beginning with comment 52651
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
emarkp
Member since:
2005-09-10

I'm talking about basing the language on an explicitly concurrent model of computing.

Fair enough. I disagree on this point.

And excuse me if I don't trust the same people who came up with auto_ptr (and encouraged shared_ptr) to come up with a proper parallel C++.

Both of those have their place. If you're just knee-jerk objecting to them, then I'm afraid your credibility drops to near zero.

But you'll never be able to have a good GC in C++! As long as you can convert an integer into a pointer, you'll need a conservative GC, and that makes a lot of the really high-performance GC algorithms unusable.

Hell, C++ can't even support a compacting GC!

Now you're just exposing your ignorance. Read up on what has been done in Managed C++. Part of it includes the ability to include or exclude objects from the GC heap. Different rules apply to the GC heap objects. The CLI GC is compacting, and the (just released) VS2005 includes Managed C++ with GC.

Reply Parent Score: 1

rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

Both of those have their place. If you're just knee-jerk objecting to them, then I'm afraid your credibility drops to near zero.

It's hardly knee jerk opposition. I speak as someone whose been programming in C++ for years. I think the whole "modern C++" thing is great, but smart pointers are just plain dumb. Even the Boost guys admit they are slow. They don't fill a niche that needs to be filled --- they are slower than GC, and more cumbersome to use.

Now you're just exposing your ignorance. Read up on what has been done in Managed C++.

Managed C++ isn't C++. It's C# dolled up to look like C++.

Reply Parent Score: 1

emarkp Member since:
2005-09-10

More ignorance. auto_ptr was made for a specific purpose. It works well for that purpose, and has a deterministic lifetime. That deterministic lifetime is important, and the reason I've been won over to the GC model in Managed C++.

Calling Managed C++ "dolled up C#" is ridiculous. It is a collection of conforming extensions which in VS2005 bring true GC to C++. Dinkumware worked with MS to even make the STL work with GC objects.

The C++ committee has paid close attention to the C++/CLI work because it will likely address GC in the future, and the CLI work is a great start.

Reply Parent Score: 1