Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 20:46 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
General Development I like this one: "By definition, a program is an entity that is run by the computer. It talks directly to the CPU and the OS. Code that does not talk directly to the CPU and the OS, but is instead run by some other program that does talk directly to the CPU and the OS, is not a program; it's a script." Here's the other eleven.
Thread beginning with comment 533867
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: C++
by kwan_e on Tue 4th Sep 2012 23:35 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: C++"
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

"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.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: C++
by JAlexoid on Wed 5th Sep 2012 02:07 in reply to "RE[6]: C++"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

And that's the fault of the language is it?

A problem doesn't mean fault. (See hardware drivers for FOSS OS'es)
Also, you're being defensive.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: C++
by kwan_e on Wed 5th Sep 2012 02:37 in reply to "RE[7]: C++"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

"And that's the fault of the language is it?

A problem doesn't mean fault. (See hardware drivers for FOSS OS'es)
Also, you're being defensive.
"

Can't see how I can avoid being defensive when I'm writing in defense of C++...

I just can't believe the fuzzy thinking that goes into tech criticism. Problems with programmers are confused with the problems of the language. Personal preferences are confused with problems of the language. What you call defensive, I call seeking to get people to understand what they're saying rather than just "X is bad because of completely unrelated reasons".

* Unlike most other geeks, I don't have a problem with fuzzy thinking in general. I appreciate it for the creativity it can produce, but not for deductive reasoning.

Reply Parent Score: 3