Linked by MOS6510 on Thu 10th Jan 2013 23:25 UTC
"For years I've tried my damnedest to get away from C. Too simple, too many details to manage, too old and crufty, too low level. I've had intense and torrid love affairs with Java, C++, and Erlang. I've built things I'm proud of with all of them, and yet each has broken my heart. They've made promises they couldn't keep, created cultures that focus on the wrong things, and made devastating tradeoffs that eventually make you suffer painfully. And I keep crawling back to C."
Thread beginning with comment 548657
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.
RE[5]: Sorry, C++ is a PITA.
by kwan_e on Mon 14th Jan 2013 01:17
in reply to "RE[4]: Sorry, C++ is a PITA."
Member since:2007-02-18
Java is a much simpler language than C++, without templates, pointers, etc.
Java has generics. It even looks like C++ template syntax. Except with Java generics, you lose type information so you can't write:
if( obj instanceof HashMap<String, String> )
You have to write:
if( obj instanceof HashMap<?, ?> )
A non-Java programmer looking to read Java code is going to have a much easier job understanding what he sees, than a non-C++ programmer looking to read C++ code.
In my experience, Java's over reliance on inheritance makes the behaviour of Java code very hard to figure out just by looking at it. In general I find dependence on a debugger to contribute more to unreadable design than anything else.
Member since:
2008-08-19
Let's blame the "German language designers" for creating a language that not all people can understand.
It's easy to mock, but his point was not unreasonable - Java is a much simpler language than C++, without templates, pointers, etc. A non-Java programmer looking to read Java code is going to have a much easier job understanding what he sees, than a non-C++ programmer looking to read C++ code.