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

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #68705 > unrolled thread

"CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”"

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

Contents

  "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2019-09-26 17:37 -0500
    Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" woodbrian77@gmail.com - 2019-09-27 09:24 -0700
    Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2019-09-27 09:54 -0700
      Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-27 19:30 +0200
        Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2019-09-28 08:25 +0200
          Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-28 10:35 +0200
            Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2019-09-28 01:51 -0700
              Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2019-09-28 04:55 -0700
                Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-09-28 22:08 +0100
                Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Frederick Gotham <cauldwell.thomas@gmail.com> - 2019-09-30 02:16 -0700
                  Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2019-09-30 02:59 -0700
                    Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Frederick Gotham <cauldwell.thomas@gmail.com> - 2019-09-30 03:31 -0700
                      Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-30 15:22 +0200
            Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2019-09-28 13:33 +0200
              Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-09-28 12:37 -0700
                Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-09-29 10:09 +0000
                  Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-29 12:48 +0200
                    Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-30 19:38 +0000
                      Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2019-09-30 13:38 -0700
                        Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2019-09-30 13:42 -0700
                      Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-10-01 09:20 +0200
                        Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-10-01 00:58 -0700
                          Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-10-01 10:58 +0200
                          Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-10-07 21:23 +0000
                            Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-10-07 22:20 +0000
                            Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-10-08 09:23 +0000
                              Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-10-08 19:47 +0000
                                Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-10-08 19:53 +0000
                                Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-10-09 07:02 +0000
                                  Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-10-09 10:06 +0200
                                    Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-10-09 13:57 +0000
                                      Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-10-09 17:29 +0200
                                  Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-10-09 09:00 +0000
                                  Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-10-09 11:09 -0400
                                    Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-10-09 15:40 +0000
                                      Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-10-09 17:11 +0100
                                      Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-10-10 09:32 +0000
                        Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-10-01 15:20 +0200
                  Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" seeplus <boardmounrt@gmail.com> - 2019-09-29 05:02 -0700
            Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2019-09-28 18:49 +0200
              Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-09-28 19:50 +0200
            Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-09-29 10:06 +0000
              Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-29 14:21 +0200
                Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-09-29 13:33 +0000
                  Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-29 15:46 +0200
                Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2019-09-29 15:43 +0100
          Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2019-09-28 05:05 -0700
            Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2019-09-28 15:52 +0200
              Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2019-09-28 07:34 -0700
                Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2019-09-28 16:47 +0200
                  Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2019-09-28 08:39 -0700
        Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-09-29 04:40 -0700
      Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-28 07:43 +1200
        Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2019-09-27 13:01 -0700
        Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" red floyd <dont.bother@its.invalid> - 2019-09-27 14:38 -0700
          Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-28 10:51 +1200
            Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter “De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable”" rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2019-09-27 16:11 -0700
            Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-09-29 10:17 +0000
              Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-29 14:34 +0200
              Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-09-29 09:49 -0700
                Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???" "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-09-29 12:59 -0400

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#68835 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On 30/09/2019 21:38, Richard wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
> 
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> spake the secret code
> <qmq268$m5l$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
> 
>> The programming world has a big problem with its image, and often it is 
>> seen as not being inclusive enough.
> 
> The programming community is as inclusive as it needs to be in that
> it doesn't exclude anyone.  You got the skills and the motivation
> and you're in.  It's as simple as that.

It is a slightly odd situation.  Individual programmers are, mostly,
inclusive in that sense.  There are a few who mistreat others from
prejudice (I've seen it occasionally in c.l.c and c.l.c++, but only
rarely).  Basically, most programmers are simply not particularly
interested in others' appearances, personal life, etc. - programmers are
rarely the most social of people, and they are relatively immune to the
social pressures that are often behind prejudice.

However, when someone looks from the outside at a community of
programmers, there is a strong homogeneity about it - the solid majority
will be white males, for example.  (Obviously the dominant racial
background will be different outside of North America, Europe and
Australasia, but the gender dominance will not.)  This is a hard barrier
to entry for people who don't fit the programmer norm.  If a young woman
wants to study programming at university, she will be faced with "Why do
you want to be a programmer?  It's a guy thing - for nerds who live in
their parent's basement".  Other programmers either don't care, or are
happy to see a bit of variety in their ranks.

That is why I say that the programming world has image problems - /not/
that programmers themselves are not inclusive people.

>  It has always been this way.
> Maybe in the deep south during the Jim Crow era, you would be refused
> a job as a programmer in a "data center", but everyone has access to
> computers and programming has never been easier and the Jim Crow era
> is a distant memory to anyone who was alive at the time.
> 
> At this point, the barrier is one of individual motivation and
> interest and nothing more.
> 

There is no barrier that we, the programmers themselves, have erected.
Yet there is still a barrier.

(You see similar barriers in many other fields.)

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

#68837 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 10:20:29 UTC+3, David Brown  wrote:
> On 30/09/2019 21:38, Richard wrote:
> > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
> > 
> > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> spake the secret code
> > <qmq268$m5l$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
> > 
> >> The programming world has a big problem with its image, and often it is 
> >> seen as not being inclusive enough.
> > 
> > The programming community is as inclusive as it needs to be in that
> > it doesn't exclude anyone.  You got the skills and the motivation
> > and you're in.  It's as simple as that.
> 
> It is a slightly odd situation.  Individual programmers are, mostly,
> inclusive in that sense.  There are a few who mistreat others from
> prejudice (I've seen it occasionally in c.l.c and c.l.c++, but only
> rarely).  Basically, most programmers are simply not particularly
> interested in others' appearances, personal life, etc. - programmers are
> rarely the most social of people, and they are relatively immune to the
> social pressures that are often behind prejudice.
> 
> However, when someone looks from the outside at a community of
> programmers, there is a strong homogeneity about it - the solid majority
> will be white males, for example.  (Obviously the dominant racial
> background will be different outside of North America, Europe and
> Australasia, but the gender dominance will not.)  This is a hard barrier
> to entry for people who don't fit the programmer norm.  If a young woman
> wants to study programming at university, she will be faced with "Why do
> you want to be a programmer?  It's a guy thing - for nerds who live in
> their parent's basement".  Other programmers either don't care, or are
> happy to see a bit of variety in their ranks.
> 
> That is why I say that the programming world has image problems - /not/
> that programmers themselves are not inclusive people.

I see plenty of female programmers here, in my previous team there was
3. And on the other hand is unlikely that schoolboy who wears dress
can change gender-related stereotypes in calcificated brains of
university teachers.

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

#68841 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On 01/10/2019 09:58, Öö Tiib wrote:
> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 10:20:29 UTC+3, David Brown  wrote:

>> That is why I say that the programming world has image problems - /not/
>> that programmers themselves are not inclusive people.
> 
> I see plenty of female programmers here, in my previous team there was
> 3.

The world progresses (at least sometimes!).

> And on the other hand is unlikely that schoolboy who wears dress
> can change gender-related stereotypes in calcificated brains of
> university teachers.
> 

True.  But it might inspire other "differently normal" people that
/they/ don't have to conform to stereotypes.  I don't expect it to make
a big difference, but little steps add up over time.

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

#69107 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On Tue, 2019-10-01, Öö Tiib wrote:
> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 10:20:29 UTC+3, David Brown  wrote:
...
>> That is why I say that the programming world has image problems - /not/
>> that programmers themselves are not inclusive people.
>
> I see plenty of female programmers here, in my previous team there was
> 3.

I see almost none here.  Some female testers, yes; many women leading
teams, working with requirements and so on.  But almost no
programmers.

I also have met no openly gay or transgender programmers.

And yet the programmers I've met are a weird and interesting bunch of people
who don't match any particular stereotype.

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

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

#69108 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> writes:
>On Tue, 2019-10-01, Öö Tiib wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 10:20:29 UTC+3, David Brown  wrote:
>...
>>> That is why I say that the programming world has image problems - /not/
>>> that programmers themselves are not inclusive people.
>>
>> I see plenty of female programmers here, in my previous team there was
>> 3.
>
>I see almost none here.  Some female testers, yes; many women leading
>teams, working with requirements and so on.  But almost no
>programmers.

I've seen the programmer ratio change a lot over the last forty years.  In the early 80's,
it was about 50/50 (at least at the Burroughs mainframe California
operations); including at the first level of management in the programming
activity.   The ratio was much lower in the hardware engineering (processor
and peripheral design) groups.

Now, the ratio significantly favors males even in programming, and it has for
a couple of decades.

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

#69115 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-10-01, Öö Tiib wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 10:20:29 UTC+3, David Brown  wrote:
> ...
>>> That is why I say that the programming world has image problems - /not/
>>> that programmers themselves are not inclusive people.
>>
>> I see plenty of female programmers here, in my previous team there was
>> 3.
> 
> I see almost none here.  Some female testers, yes; many women leading
> teams, working with requirements and so on.  But almost no
> programmers.

It should be completely inconsequential how many female (or any other
inconsequential characteristic you may choose) programmers there may
or may not be.

People should be treated as individuals, each with their own unique
talents, experience, knowledge, opinions, qualifications and flaws.
We should form an opinion of a person, or a group of people, only
when we get to know them. We should not form prejudicial opinions
about people based solely on inconsequential external characteristics.
It shouldn't matter what those external characteristics should be.

I consider sentiments like "we need more female programmers" to be
prejudicial and detrimental. People should be treated as individuals,
not as members of some demographic group, like sex or race. When someone
says "we need more female programmers", they are already categorizing
people into slots based in characteristics that should be completely
irrelevant and inconsequential when it comes to the subject in question
(ie. programming in this case).

People should be treated equally, with no discrimination nor preferential
treatmet. People should not be encouraged into a particular hobby or
professional career because of what they are (eg. "female"). All people
should be taught the same things and given the same opportunities, and
allowed to make their own choices about their own lives, hobbies and
careers based on their own interests and talents. People should have no
business in coaxing other people into a particular path, especially if
that coaxing is done for some identity politics reasons.

So, even if there are significantly more male programmers than there
are female ones, my response to that is: So what? Who cares? People
should be free to choose their own hobbies and their own careers.
I don't really care if more males choose programming than females.
It's their choice. Let people make their choice. Stop looking at
people's external characteristics, and start looking at them as that:
People. Unique individuals, not just as members of some particular
group.

A lot of harm is done by trying to coax people into career paths that they
wouldn't have chosen by themselves. It leads to dropping out of schools,
and unhappy lives working on a field they aren't necessarily so interested
in.

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

#69129 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On Tue, 2019-10-08, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2019-10-01, Öö Tiib wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 10:20:29 UTC+3, David Brown  wrote:
>> ...
>>>> That is why I say that the programming world has image problems - /not/
>>>> that programmers themselves are not inclusive people.
>>>
>>> I see plenty of female programmers here, in my previous team there was
>>> 3.
>> 
>> I see almost none here.  Some female testers, yes; many women leading
>> teams, working with requirements and so on.  But almost no
>> programmers.
>
> It should be completely inconsequential how many female (or any other
> inconsequential characteristic you may choose) programmers there may
> or may not be.
>
> People should be treated as individuals, each with their own unique
> talents, experience, knowledge, opinions, qualifications and flaws.
> We should form an opinion of a person, or a group of people, only
> when we get to know them. We should not form prejudicial opinions
> about people based solely on inconsequential external characteristics.
> It shouldn't matter what those external characteristics should be.
>
> I consider sentiments like "we need more female programmers" to be
> prejudicial and detrimental. People should be treated as individuals,
> not as members of some demographic group, like sex or race. When someone
> says "we need more female programmers", they are already categorizing
> people into slots based in characteristics that should be completely
> irrelevant and inconsequential when it comes to the subject in question
> (ie. programming in this case).

Look at it this way: a lack of women in programming is a clear sign
that we're missing out on talented programmers: people who would be
good at it and who would enjoy it.

[snip]

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

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

#69130 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> spake the secret code
<slrnqpppuf.cdo.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> thusly:

>Look at it this way: a lack of women in programming is a clear sign
>that we're missing out on talented programmers: people who would be
>good at it and who would enjoy it.

What evidence do you have that:
a) we're missing out on talented programmers
b) they would be people that are good at it
c) they are people who would enjoy it

These all seem to be suppositions and not facts.

a) We can't know that we're missing out on talented programmers unless
they already demonstrated that they were talented programmers and
decided to stop programming for some reason.  If they decided to stop,
then we're not missing out on them unless you plan on forcing them to
return to programming.

b) We can't know that they would be good at it until they try.

c) We can't presume to know their internal mental likes and dislikes
better than them -- this is the path of hubris.  Instead, we can only
ask them after they have tried it if they enjoyed it.  Until they try
and tell us whether they like it or not, it is only supposition.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
            The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org>
     The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

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

#69135 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> Look at it this way: a lack of women in programming is a clear sign
> that we're missing out on talented programmers: people who would be
> good at it and who would enjoy it.

On what do you base this opinion on?

If, for whatever reason, women on average are less interested in computer
programming than men, and this is the cause for there being more male
programmers, why would inducing women to choose a career path they are not
interested in make them "be good at and and enjoy it"?

Somehow I get the feeling that you subscribe to the "tabula rasa", or
"blank slate" theory. In other words, that there are exactly zero
differences between the average man and the average woman, that they
have no innate characteristics (eg. in personality, personal interests
and talents) and that the only and sole reason for any differences is
because society teachest them to be different. Thus it would simply be
a question of "teaching women to enjoy programming" to make them enjoy
programming and be interested in it and be good at it, as if people's
personalities and interests were malleable and completely up to whatever
society teaches them and wants them to be.

Not only does this idea go against all evidence and studies on the
subject, in fact I find it insulting. It considers people to be
mindless robots which can be programmed to be whatever we want them
to be. Teach them thing X, and they will automatically be interested
in thing X and become good at it. Teach them thing Y, and likewise
they will become interested in thing Y and become good at it. Like
programmable robots with no agency and innate personalities and
characteristics.

Treat everybody equally, teach everybody the same things, and give
everybody the same opportunities to choose their preferred career
paths, and allow them to choose whatever they like and want. Don't
try to coax people into a particular career path just because you
think "we need more people with inconsequential characteristic X
in this career path". Treat people as people, not as robots.

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

#69137 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On 09/10/2019 09:02, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>> Look at it this way: a lack of women in programming is a clear sign
>> that we're missing out on talented programmers: people who would be
>> good at it and who would enjoy it.
> 
> On what do you base this opinion on?
> 
> If, for whatever reason, women on average are less interested in computer
> programming than men, and this is the cause for there being more male
> programmers, why would inducing women to choose a career path they are not
> interested in make them "be good at and and enjoy it"?
> 

I am quite happy with the idea of getting the best people (in terms of
ability, personal enjoyment, etc.) for jobs - without regard to gender,
age, or anything else.  And I believe it is fine to say that some
classifications of people are, on average, going to be better suited for
a particular task than others.  But you have to keep in mind that this
is only on average, and does not apply to individuals.

However, there is a very real risk that people who have the potential to
be good at a task, don't get involved in it as a result of these average
biases.  It might be that they see the bias and underrate themselves
because of it, or maybe others underrate them.  It may be an active
choice - they don't want to be in a minority situation.  There can be
many reasons.

If I am screening candidates for a programming job, I am not going to
give someone a higher rating because they are a woman, or old, or have
two heads, or whatever - I rate them based on how I think they can do
the job.  But I think there is a problem that there are people who
/could/ have been right for the job, but never got to that point because
they are a women, old, or have two heads.  (I think this effect is less
than it used to be - we are moving in the right direction.)

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

#69140 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
> If I am screening candidates for a programming job, I am not going to
> give someone a higher rating because they are a woman, or old, or have
> two heads, or whatever - I rate them based on how I think they can do
> the job.  But I think there is a problem that there are people who
> /could/ have been right for the job, but never got to that point because
> they are a women, old, or have two heads.  (I think this effect is less
> than it used to be - we are moving in the right direction.)

It can be an interesting discussion to have whether in our modern society
there exist people who would have been talented and interested in a
particular hobby or career path, but never got to even try it because of,
for example, personal prejudice based on misinformation, because of never
having been presented information on that subject, or having been
inadvertently or deliberately discouraged from even pursuing such a path
by misinformed and prejudiced people.

That's the only explanation given and accepted by the modern feminist
doctrine, but I don't think it's that simple. There may be some cases,
even to this day, of that happening, but I'm not so sure of how much
it happens, or whether it's even a majority of such cases.

However, my problem is not really with that discussion. My main problem
is that in the modern world the steps taken to try to rectify that
problem (even assuming it's real and accurate) have gone in many ways
way, way too far. These steps have only escalated more and more in
the past few decades, at an ever-accelerating rate.

The discrimination in enrollment that universities like Harvard engage
in (where they require higher scores from Asians than from white people,
and from white people than from Hispanics, for instance, which I
consider astonisingly egregious and racist) is but the *mildest*
example of this.

The example I mentioned before, about the PHP Central Europe conference
not just being cancelled, but terminated completely and forever,
because some random person (who wasn't even attending) complained about
the speakers being "old white men" or something like that, is especially
egregious. There was literally zero discrimination or preferential
treatment by the organizers, and they did absolutely nothing wrong,
and many of the would-be speakers who bailed out because of that tweet
even outright admitted that, yet they still bailed out, and the entire
conference had to be terminated because of lack of attendance. Because
of a completely ridiculous nontroversy started by some random person
completely unaffiliated with the conference.

When you start introducing modern identity politics into something like
this, that's a sure way to introduce discontent, infighting, division
and eventually destruction, into something that has absolutely nothing
to do with politics, identity or otherwise. And it won't be the alleged
"sexists" and "misogynists" who will be destroying it. It will be the
people who classify themselves as feminists.

So the exact moment that I see identity politics being shoved into something
that has absolutely nothing to do with it, like a C++ conference, that's
a huge warning sign for me. It predicts destruction.

Just wait and see how long it takes before prominent figures in the C++
community start being accused of all kinds of things, and the purge
starts. You'll see.

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

#69147 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On 09/10/2019 15:57, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>> If I am screening candidates for a programming job, I am not going to
>> give someone a higher rating because they are a woman, or old, or have
>> two heads, or whatever - I rate them based on how I think they can do
>> the job.  But I think there is a problem that there are people who
>> /could/ have been right for the job, but never got to that point because
>> they are a women, old, or have two heads.  (I think this effect is less
>> than it used to be - we are moving in the right direction.)
> 
> It can be an interesting discussion to have whether in our modern society
> there exist people who would have been talented and interested in a
> particular hobby or career path, but never got to even try it because of,
> for example, personal prejudice based on misinformation, because of never
> having been presented information on that subject, or having been
> inadvertently or deliberately discouraged from even pursuing such a path
> by misinformed and prejudiced people.
> 
> That's the only explanation given and accepted by the modern feminist
> doctrine, but I don't think it's that simple. There may be some cases,
> even to this day, of that happening, but I'm not so sure of how much
> it happens, or whether it's even a majority of such cases.
> 

I can't answer that.  But I agree that it is a relevant question.

There are lots of differences between people.  Some are genetic, some
are from upbringing, some are due to preferences of the people, some are
due to influences from others, some are luck of where you are born and
who your parents are, and so on.  Some give obvious advantages or
disadvantages for different tasks - being rather short, it was never
likely that I'd be a good competitive sportsman.  Others may be less
obvious, or less known (especially when one means "proven
scientifically" rather than "commonly accepted bias"), or less socially
acceptable.

> 
> So the exact moment that I see identity politics being shoved into something
> that has absolutely nothing to do with it, like a C++ conference, that's
> a huge warning sign for me. It predicts destruction.

Again, I am not convinced this is "politics" - but again, I don't think
it is a word that is very clearly defined.

I am not keen on the idea of forcing some sort of equality - I don't
think you improve the average ability of a traditionally male-dominated
profession by pushing in more women, or that you improve a traditionally
female-dominated profession by pushing in more men.  But I /do/ think
there are plenty of situations where a traditionally minority group
feels unwelcome or - equally bad, in a way - overly welcome (such as
being treated specially as the only woman in the group, or only man).
And this is bad for that group or profession - it hinders the selection
based purely on suitability for the task.

I don't know a good solution for getting from that situation to one
where no one (either in the group, or outside it) cares about whether a
programmer is male or female, or any other non-relevant aspect of
people.  One possible way is to use quotas or positive biases as a
temporary measure, to counter any negative biases, until the mixed group
is established as "normal" - then the active bias can be gradually
removed as unnecessary.

But whether that is the right approach or not - and if so, where and how
much positive bias should be used - I have no idea.  I like programming
- I can see if something is a 0 or a 1.  It is much simpler than
psychology, sociology, or politics.

> 
> Just wait and see how long it takes before prominent figures in the C++
> community start being accused of all kinds of things, and the purge
> starts. You'll see.
> 

Why should the C++ world miss out on the fun?  That would not be fair,
and this is all about equality.

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

#69138 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On Wed, 2019-10-09, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>> Look at it this way: a lack of women in programming is a clear sign
>> that we're missing out on talented programmers: people who would be
>> good at it and who would enjoy it.
>
> On what do you base this opinion on?
>
> If, for whatever reason, women on average are less interested in computer
> programming than men, and this is the cause for there being more male
> programmers, why would inducing women to choose a career path they are not
> interested in make them "be good at and and enjoy it"?

I never suggested that.  I have no idea how we should get the right
programmers in the future (apart from focusing more on talent and less
on formal education).

> Somehow I get the feeling that you subscribe to the "tabula rasa", or
> "blank slate" theory.

I don't.  But I don't subscribe to the theory that our society is
ideal and we shouldn't try to change anything.

[snip a fairly large strawman]

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

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

#69143 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On 10/9/19 3:02 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>> Look at it this way: a lack of women in programming is a clear sign
>> that we're missing out on talented programmers: people who would be
>> good at it and who would enjoy it.
> 
> On what do you base this opinion on?
> 
> If, for whatever reason, women on average are less interested in computer
> programming than men, and this is the cause for there being more male
> programmers, why would inducing women to choose a career path they are not
> interested in make them "be good at and and enjoy it"?
> 
> Somehow I get the feeling that you subscribe to the "tabula rasa", or
> "blank slate" theory. In other words, that there are exactly zero
> differences between the average man and the average woman,

I doubt that he subscribes to any such ridiculous theory. A much more
plausible one would suffice to justify his comments. For instance, the
theory that there are some differences between the average man and the
average woman, but that many aspects of our society conspire to
discourage women from pursuing traditionally male roles (and vice
versa), even if the woman is interested in doing so, and is sufficiently
competent to compete for such a role, if she hadn't been discouraged
from doing so.
It can be difficult to measure the severity of such discouragements, or
even to prove that they exist. However, that doesn't mean that they
don't exist.

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

#69148 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> spake the secret code
<qnkt7s$jlu$1@dont-email.me> thusly:

>[...] but that many aspects of our society *conspire* to
>discourage women from pursuing traditionally male roles (and vice
>versa), even if the woman is interested in doing so, and is sufficiently
>competent to compete for such a role, if she hadn't been discouraged
>from doing so.

[Emphasis added]

This constantly comes up about women being "discouraged" to enter into
STEM fields.  I'm an old fart now and you might have considered that
"back in the day" women would have been discouraged from STEM fields, but
even 40 years ago this was not the case and it is certainly not the
case now.

The more plausible theory is not that there is some kind of
"conspiracy" that discourages or prevents women from entering STEM
positions, but that they simply don't choose those careers.  It isn't
interesting to women generally and they don't pursue those careers.
Nothing is keeping them out, nothing is discouraging them, and in fact
it is MASSIVELY the other way with women constantly being encouraged
to enter STEM fields and constantly being "empowered" to enter
programming fields.  .....and yet, they still don't.  I think it's
time to acknowledge that women, as a general statement, simply don't
pick these fields because they aren't that interested in them.

As long as people have the freedom to choose their career paths that
best suit their own tastes, there are always going to be imbalances.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
            The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org>
     The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

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

#69149 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On 09/10/2019 16:40, Richard wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
> 
> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> spake the secret code
> <qnkt7s$jlu$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
> 
>> [...] but that many aspects of our society *conspire* to
>> discourage women from pursuing traditionally male roles (and vice
>> versa), even if the woman is interested in doing so, and is sufficiently
>> competent to compete for such a role, if she hadn't been discouraged
>>from doing so.
> 
> [Emphasis added]
> 
> This constantly comes up about women being "discouraged" to enter into
> STEM fields.  I'm an old fart now and you might have considered that
> "back in the day" women would have been discouraged from STEM fields, but
> even 40 years ago this was not the case and it is certainly not the
> case now.
> 
> The more plausible theory is not that there is some kind of
> "conspiracy" that discourages or prevents women from entering STEM
> positions, but that they simply don't choose those careers.  It isn't
> interesting to women generally and they don't pursue those careers.
> Nothing is keeping them out, nothing is discouraging them, and in fact
> it is MASSIVELY the other way with women constantly being encouraged
> to enter STEM fields and constantly being "empowered" to enter
> programming fields.  .....and yet, they still don't.  I think it's
> time to acknowledge that women, as a general statement, simply don't
> pick these fields because they aren't that interested in them.

So you use the words "as a general statement" to hopefully qualify the 
following statement as not being sexist.  Sorry mate but it doesn't wash.

/Flibble

-- 
"Snakes didn't evolve, instead talking snakes with legs changed into 
snakes." - Rick C. Hodgin

“You won’t burn in hell. But be nice anyway.” – Ricky Gervais

“I see Atheists are fighting and killing each other again, over who 
doesn’t believe in any God the most. Oh, no..wait.. that never happens.” – 
Ricky Gervais

"Suppose it's all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and are 
confronted by God," Bryne asked on his show The Meaning of Life. "What 
will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?"
"I'd say, bone cancer in children? What's that about?" Fry replied.
"How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery 
that is not our fault. It's not right, it's utterly, utterly evil."
"Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a 
world that is so full of injustice and pain. That's what I would say."

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

#69169 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

Richard <legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com> wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
> 
> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> spake the secret code
> <qnkt7s$jlu$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
> 
>>[...] but that many aspects of our society *conspire* to
>>discourage women from pursuing traditionally male roles (and vice
>>versa), even if the woman is interested in doing so, and is sufficiently
>>competent to compete for such a role, if she hadn't been discouraged
>>from doing so.
> 
> [Emphasis added]
> 
> This constantly comes up about women being "discouraged" to enter into
> STEM fields.  I'm an old fart now and you might have considered that
> "back in the day" women would have been discouraged from STEM fields, but
> even 40 years ago this was not the case and it is certainly not the
> case now.

It's especially ludicrous to claim that there's some kind of
"conspiracy" to keep women out of STEM given the fact that in
many universities (perhaps even the majority of them, especially
in certain countries) female students in STEM fields have actually
become the sizeable *majority*. I believe that in certain universities
the numbers go as high as 60% or more.

Yet, still, the number of women *working* in STEM fields remains the
minority. Why is that?

I think that the answer lies in the dropout rates in those universities
in those STEM courses. The explanation is rather simple: When you
induce people to take advanced courses that they aren't really
interested in, they will get quickly disinterested and bored of it,
and will start failing exams and dropping out.

In many universities many STEM departments are suffering because of
high dropout rates, which lowers their yearly budgets. And the reason
is this massive campaign to get disinterested people into their courses.

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

#68852 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On 10/1/2019 9:20 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 30/09/2019 21:38, Richard wrote:
>> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>>
>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> spake the secret code
>> <qmq268$m5l$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
>>
>>> The programming world has a big problem with its image, and often it is
>>> seen as not being inclusive enough.
>>
>> The programming community is as inclusive as it needs to be in that
>> it doesn't exclude anyone.  You got the skills and the motivation
>> and you're in.  It's as simple as that.
> 
> It is a slightly odd situation.  Individual programmers are, mostly,
> inclusive in that sense.  There are a few who mistreat others from
> prejudice (I've seen it occasionally in c.l.c and c.l.c++, but only
> rarely).  Basically, most programmers are simply not particularly
> interested in others' appearances, personal life, etc. - programmers are
> rarely the most social of people, and they are relatively immune to the
> social pressures that are often behind prejudice.

This part of the story.

> 
> However, when someone looks from the outside at a community of
> programmers, there is a strong homogeneity about it - the solid majority
> will be white males, for example.  (Obviously the dominant racial
> background will be different outside of North America, Europe and
> Australasia, but the gender dominance will not.)  This is a hard barrier
> to entry for people who don't fit the programmer norm.
It is true that the majority may be male, but

   If a young woman
> wants to study programming at university, she will be faced with "Why do
> you want to be a programmer?  It's a guy thing - for nerds who live in
> their parent's basement".
This is where I disagree. I don't think it is realistic.
It is not even realistic any more in jobs like car repairing, metal 
industry or similar stereotypes, much less in a young job market as SW 
development.
I agree with the opinion of Richard on this point.

   Other programmers either don't care, or are
> happy to see a bit of variety in their ranks.
> 
> That is why I say that the programming world has image problems - /not/
> that programmers themselves are not inclusive people.
> 
>>   It has always been this way.
>> Maybe in the deep south during the Jim Crow era, you would be refused
>> a job as a programmer in a "data center", but everyone has access to
>> computers and programming has never been easier and the Jim Crow era
>> is a distant memory to anyone who was alive at the time.
>>
>> At this point, the barrier is one of individual motivation and
>> interest and nothing more.
This is where I agree.

>>
> 
> There is no barrier that we, the programmers themselves, have erected.
> Yet there is still a barrier.
It is a matter of personal interest and motivation, it is not a barrier.

> 
> (You see similar barriers in many other fields.)
> 

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

#68753 — Re: "CppCon 2019: Herb Sutter ???De-fragmenting C++: Making Exceptions and RTTI More Affordable and Usable???"

On Sunday, September 29, 2019 at 8:10:07 PM UTC+10, Juha Nieminen wrote:

> They could have left their virtue-signaling out of it, and everybody
> would have been just fine with it, and no controversy of any kind would
> happen. But no. They had to virtue-signal. They had to show how virtuous
> and progressive they are. They had to try to score virtue points, and
> introduce politics into something that doesn't need it.

Greta must have turned down the gig.

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

#68736

On 9/28/19 10:35 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 28/09/2019 08:25, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
>> Am 27.09.19 um 19:30 schrieb David Brown:
>>> On 27/09/2019 18:54, rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The keynote with Bjarne Stroustrup was prefaced by a boy in drag.
>>>>
>>>> I contacted the CppCon and told them it was inappropriate
>>
>>> I know you don't read my posts, I know this is off-topic, and I know 
>>> it might provoke another ridiculous sermon.  But it bothers me too 
>>> much to see prejudice left uncommented.
>>>
>>> The man introducing the speaker has long hair.  That is /all/.
>>
>> I think he was referring to that video:
>>
>> https://youtu.be/u_ij0YNkFUs?t=30
> 
> That wasn't the video linked.
> 
>>
>> The teenage boy here wears a dress.
> 
> Yes.  So what?  People can wear what they want, dress as they like, 
> within the standards considered acceptable to the people around in the 
> context in question.  His clothes are entirely respectable - merely a 
> little unusual.

I'll have a bit of an out-of-the-choir voice here.

My question is why the boy was invited on stage.
I am open to correction, but it is possible that the boy's outfit was 
the reason Jon Kalb invited him on the stage - possibly to promote a 
message about minorities' inclusion (or anything else, my only point is 
that whatever the reason it doesn't seem related to software development).

 From this perspective, irrespective of the moderator's intentions, it 
can be seen as an off-topic sketch in a software conference. In other 
words, if Rick gets criticism (rightly) when he uses the audience of 
this newsgroup to spread his message about the bible, maybe the action 
of using an audience gathered to listen to Bjarne for a different 
purpose can be seen as a stretch as well.

[snipping even further digression]

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

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

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

csiph-web