Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #87283
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? |
| Date | 2022-11-08 11:29 +0000 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <tkdeht$8bb$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <tk14tc$1h5hb$6@dont-email.me> <fafc95cb-aecb-4235-9cc8-6b948366ca2an@googlegroups.com> |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> wrote: > You keep on adding features to the language which have unintuitive syntax and odd rules, and > don't do much to increase the number of programs you can write quickly. So what happens? > Theres not much motivation to learn these features until forced to do so. So codebases tend > to be mainly legacy, and C++ programmers' skills fall behind. For the longest time I quite strongly disagreed with the claim that C++ is becoming too big and too complicated. However, C++20 has eroded this conviction of mine somewhat. C++23 is eroding it even more. C++11 felt like a big bunch of features that the language was in dire need of, and genuinely made programming easier. C++14 and C++17 fixed and patched many of the minor problems and defects that turned out to exist in C++11, so C++17 felt like "what C++11 should have been in the first place". C++20, however, doesn't feel like this anymore. It has a few new features that genuinely help in programming, but most of it feels like just adding features for the sake of adding them. C++23 even moreso. With both there are tons of features for which I genuinely think "who exactly asked for this? Who actually needs this? Does the language truly need and benefit from this?" When you read the feature proposal papers, they feel a lot like it's just someone proposing a feature for the sake of proposing it, rather than it filling an *actual* useful need that the language is in dire need of. In many cases I don't even understand why they have been accepted. And even so, even when some feature *is* somewhat widely requested, they should still weigh in how much it *actually* contributes to the usability of the language, and how much it adds to its complexity (which is already quite high). The standardization committee seems to have a problem with saying "no" even to some sounds-like-it-could-be-useful feature proposals (not to talk about some that aren't all that useful). This feeling of adding-features-just-for-the-sake-of-adding-them is something that has really started to give me a distaste for the newer versions of the standard. Both C++20 and C++23 have actual useful features that I'm looking forward to, but they seem to be a very small minority of all features.
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
“The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-11-03 14:30 -0500
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-03 13:03 -0700
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-03 13:04 -0700
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-11-03 16:07 -0500
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-11-03 16:05 -0500
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-03 14:25 -0700
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-11-05 14:12 -0500
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-05 14:20 -0700
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-04 09:24 +0100
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-11-05 21:42 +0000
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-06 11:55 -0800
Re: “The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry” Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-11-08 02:44 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-11-08 11:29 +0000
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-11-08 03:54 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Stuart Redmann <DerTopper@web.de> - 2022-11-08 14:26 +0100
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-11-09 00:22 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-11-08 15:16 +0000
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-08 14:52 +0100
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2022-11-08 22:48 +0000
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-08 15:39 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-09 09:29 +0100
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-09 14:39 +0000
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-09 17:05 +0100
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-09 17:58 +0000
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-09 11:47 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-09 20:43 +0000
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-10 09:52 +0100
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-11-10 03:07 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-10 11:53 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-10 21:44 +0100
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-10 12:53 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-10 21:20 +0000
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-10 13:23 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-11 08:10 +0100
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-11-11 01:45 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-11-10 03:14 -0800
Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2022-11-09 07:59 -0500
csiph-web