Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #87296
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: ???The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry??? |
| Date | 2022-11-09 09:29 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <tkfoch$695m$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <tk14tc$1h5hb$6@dont-email.me> <fafc95cb-aecb-4235-9cc8-6b948366ca2an@googlegroups.com> <tkdeht$8bb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tkepas$15jv$1@dont-email.me> |
On 09/11/2022 00:39, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 11/8/2022 3:29 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote: >> 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". I agree with that. A challenge for C++ is that even when a new and better feature is added, the older and clumsier methods still have to be supported. This also means that syntax can be awkward because it can't conflict with existing syntax, and the details get more complex all the time. > > I was really excited and happy when C++ finally made atomics and membars > part of the actual standard, C++11 iirc. Before that, I would have to > code these things up in assembly language. > Standard atomics would be great if they worked for my targets. The gcc implementations (and I haven't seen any others) for "advanced" use (read-modify-write, or sizes larger than a standard register) is completely broken for single-core systems, and even on multi-core systems it is limited if you use thread priorities. The trouble with them is that no one has addressed the elephant in the room - in general, you need OS support and locks to implement large atomics.
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