Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #119922 > unrolled thread

C++ is doomed

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++

Contents

  C++ is doomed wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 11:04 +0800
    Re: C++ is doomed Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 11:47 +0200
    Re: C++ is doomed David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> - 2024-08-28 11:36 +0000
      Re: C++ is doomed wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 20:24 +0800
        Re: C++ is doomed wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 20:53 +0800
      Re: C++ is doomed Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 20:13 -0700
        Re: C++ is doomed "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 18:29 -0700
          Re: C++ is doomed Mad Hamish <newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> - 2024-08-30 17:24 +1000
            Re: C++ is doomed Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-08-30 12:56 +0300
              Re: C++ is doomed wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-08-30 20:26 +0800
                Re: C++ is doomed wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-08-30 20:28 +0800
            Re: C++ is doomed "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-30 12:46 -0700
          Re: C++ is doomed jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-08-30 11:26 -0400
            Re: C++ is doomed "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-30 12:48 -0700
    Re: C++ is doomed "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 18:28 -0700
      Re: C++ is doomed geodandw <geodandw@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 23:35 -0400
        Re: C++ is doomed "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 21:16 -0700
        Re: C++ is doomed Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-08-29 09:44 +0300
        Re: C++ is doomed Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-29 11:01 +0200
          Re: C++ is doomed "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-29 12:37 -0700
            Re: C++ is doomed Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-08-30 00:34 +0300
      Re: C++ is doomed Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-08-29 20:33 -0400
        Re: C++ is doomed jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-08-30 11:32 -0400
    Re: C++ is doomed Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-08-29 09:38 -0400
    Re: C++ is doomed Mad Hamish <newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> - 2024-08-30 17:22 +1000
      Re: C++ is doomed Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-08-30 12:51 +0300
      Re: C++ is doomed wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-08-30 20:18 +0800
    Re: C++ is doomed Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2024-09-01 21:04 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#119957

On 29.08.2024 22:37, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 8/29/2024 2:01 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 29.08.2024 um 05:35 schrieb geodandw:
>>> On 8/28/24 21:28, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>> On 8/27/2024 8:04 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>> I just surveyed a local book store for computers: Among the Top100 
>>>>> in 30 days,
>>>>> the most books is for AI using Python. C++? zero.
>>>>
>>>> It's funny when the runtime for certain langs are written in C++?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, I am not surprised. It seems C++ is the play ground of 
>>>>> "C++ inventor's" ideal,
>>>>> which is proven not very useful (or more problems than its 
>>>>> benefits, practically).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> Isn't most written in C?
>>
>> The Java-VM and the native Code inside the Java Runtime are written in 
>> C++.
> 
> C is still nice wrt creating the API's for libraries. The library itself 
> can be written in C++. However, it uses C for its exposed API.

+1, having a C API often saves the day.

But technically, you do not need to write any C code for implementing a 
C API. C++ functions declared as extern "C" and using C-compatible 
parameter types do just fine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119958

Chris M. Thomasson writes:

> On 8/27/2024 8:04 PM, wij wrote:
>> I just surveyed a local book store for computers: Among the Top100 in 30  
>> days,
>> the most books is for AI using Python. C++? zero.
>
> It's funny when the runtime for certain langs are written in C++?

Which C++ would that be?

Those certain languages predate C++11, I believe, so most of them would  
still, unfortunately, be written in pre-c++11, before work started on  
solving C++'s biggest drawback: that it was too complicated and hard to  
understand. Now, after over a decade of tireless work, everyone can finally  
agree that C++ has now been simplified to the point that anyone can master  
the language, in a very short period of time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119969

On 8/29/24 20:33, Sam wrote:
> Chris M. Thomasson writes:
> 
>> On 8/27/2024 8:04 PM, wij wrote:
>>> I just surveyed a local book store for computers: Among the Top100 in 
>>> 30 days,
>>> the most books is for AI using Python. C++? zero.
>>
>> It's funny when the runtime for certain langs are written in C++?
> 
> Which C++ would that be?
> 
> Those certain languages predate C++11, I believe, so most of them would 
> still, unfortunately, be written in pre-c++11, before work started on 
> solving C++'s biggest drawback: that it was too complicated and hard to 
> understand. Now, after over a decade of tireless work, everyone can 
> finally agree that C++ has now been simplified to the point that anyone 
> can master the language, in a very short period of time.
> 

Really?  I will have to look into C++ again.  I may have been misled by
looking at open source code like folly where I had to suppress my
"OMG, kill it! Kill it with fire!" reaction.  There just seemed to
be way more complexity than one would reasonably expect.

Joe Seigh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119947

wij wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> I just surveyed a local book store for computers: Among the Top100 in 30
> days, the most books is for AI using Python. C++? zero. 
>
> Actually, I am not surprised. It seems C++ is the play ground of "C++
> inventor's" ideal, which is proven not very useful (or more problems than its
> benefits, practically).

1.5/10 on the troll-o-meter.

-- 
A tall, dark stranger will have more fun than you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119960

On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 11:04:59 +0800, wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> wrote:

>I just surveyed a local book store for computers: Among the Top100 in 30 days, 
>the most books is for AI using Python. C++? zero. 
>
>Actually, I am not surprised. It seems C++ is the play ground of "C++ inventor's" ideal,
>which is proven not very useful (or more problems than its benefits, practically).

Frankly in the modern world bookstores are pretty much irrelevant to
assesing how people are using computers 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/793628/worldwide-developer-survey-most-used-languages/
suggests that C++ is still top 10 (and includes HTML/CSS and SQL which
are arguably not really programming languages, if you remove them then
it moves up a couple of spots)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119962

On 30.08.2024 10:22, Mad Hamish wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 11:04:59 +0800, wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I just surveyed a local book store for computers: Among the Top100 in 30 days,
>> the most books is for AI using Python. C++? zero.
>>
>> Actually, I am not surprised. It seems C++ is the play ground of "C++ inventor's" ideal,
>> which is proven not very useful (or more problems than its benefits, practically).
> 
> Frankly in the modern world bookstores are pretty much irrelevant to
> assesing how people are using computers

The last dead-tree C++ book I bought for myself was: А. И. Касаткин, А. 
Н. Вальвачев "От Turbo C к Borland C++", 1992.

The last dead-tree C++ book I bought for the company book-shelf was:
"Accelerated C++: Practical Programming by Example" by Andrew Koenig, 
Mike Hendrickson, Barbara Moo, 2000.

So you might have a point here.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119964

On Fri, 2024-08-30 at 17:22 +1000, Mad Hamish wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 11:04:59 +0800, wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > I just surveyed a local book store for computers: Among the Top100 in 30 days, 
> > the most books is for AI using Python. C++? zero. 
> > 
> > Actually, I am not surprised. It seems C++ is the play ground of "C++ inventor's" ideal,
> > which is proven not very useful (or more problems than its benefits, practically).
> 
> Frankly in the modern world bookstores are pretty much irrelevant to
> assesing how people are using computers 
> 
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/793628/worldwide-developer-survey-most-used-languages/
> suggests that C++ is still top 10 (and includes HTML/CSS and SQL which
> are arguably not really programming languages, if you remove them then
> it moves up a couple of spots)

We look things a layer deeper, and make opinions by ourselves, not other people,
not something told or suggested. And not simply "this language is good", "that
language is bad", and the realtion of the two 'conclusion' are not necessarily 
XOR.

If you like to SEE "C++ is good", look this one (C++ is in 2nd place).
TIOBBE index is even better. https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

There are several points from the title "Most used programming languages among
developers worldwide as of 2024":
 1. Most progammers use more than one language. (the interpretation of 'most 
    used' need some thought).
 2. Paid programming tasks are usually pre-determined to use certain kind of
    language(s), nothing to do with "this language is good or bad".
 3. ...

What is the book selling order you can find in your place?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119985

On 28/08/2024 04:04, wij wrote:
> I just surveyed a local book store for computers: Among the Top100 in 30 days,
> the most books is for AI using Python. C++? zero.
> 
> Actually, I am not surprised. It seems C++ is the play ground of "C++ inventor's" ideal,
> which is proven not very useful (or more problems than its benefits, practically).
> 

I think I have a C book somewhere. I have one on Pascal I can see, and 
several different assemblers. But C++? Nope. There are really good 
online references that I use when I need them. It's paper that's on the 
way  out, not C++.

I'm sure you read the news. Do you get a newspaper?

Andy

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++

csiph-web