Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 20:46 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Thread beginning with comment 533863
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"I fail to see why this is a problem. The multi-style nature of C++ is better than trying to cram every problem into an OO or functional or message passing style.
I think I already expressed this from a perspective of a person that has to hire developers to develop and maintain a codebase.
When you are a lone star programmer - C++ is great.
When you have to work with a large group of people - then it becomes a problem. "
And that's the fault of the language is it?
And no, there are not two ways of doing things in C++, there are thousands. In short - too many to be good for assembling and maintaining a team.
As another person pointed out, there is a large overlap between C++ and C. So in practice, most people actually do have similar ideas about C++.
You're confusing design with code. Programmers will always have different ideas about what DESIGN to use, whatever language it's implemented in.
Compared to languages like Python and Lisp and Java, C++ is no worse off in the different language facilities that people think of using.





Member since:
2009-05-19
I think I already expressed this from a perspective of a person that has to hire developers to develop and maintain a codebase.
When you are a lone star programmer - C++ is great.
When you have to work with a large group of people - then it becomes a problem.
And no, there are not two ways of doing things in C++, there are thousands. In short - too many to be good for assembling and maintaining a team.