Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post01.iad.highwinds-media.com!fx09.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Arved Sandstrom User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: What's the best non-JVM native language to look at? References: <428f8206-d4f7-4fe6-b93c-8f881b498be6@googlegroups.com> <99qdnVXamdWBRErPnZ2dnUVZ8mOdnZ2d@bt.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 50 Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsgroups-download.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:13:50 UTC Organization: Public Usenet Newsgroup Access Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 10:13:50 -0400 X-Received-Bytes: 3259 X-Received-Body-CRC: 2383777368 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:27416 On 01/17/2014 10:02 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:08:26 +0000, lipska the kat wrote: > >> According to lots of references on the intertubes the first C++ compiler >> was written in something called 'C with classes' which was written in >> ... C >> > Way back when C++ was the new kid on the block I remember reading that > the first C++ compilker was actually a standard C compiler with the Cfront > preprocessor substituted for the usual cpre preprocessor. > > ==== > > Personally I still can't be arsed to spend the time needed to learn C++. > I looked at it some time ago and found it offensive for both its > complexity and the obscene amount of code generated. In any case, far too > much of the so-called "C++" I've looked at has been nothing more than > ANSI C with comments delimited by "//": and not class or object in sight. > I agree about the complexity. I'll wager most people do, even C++ supporters...in fact some C++ aficionados glory in the complexity of the language. This is exactly why most C++ programmers use a small subset of the "++" stuff...and not even that always correctly. I don't know what you mean by generated code. Templates, presumably. Or is it executable size? Neither is a problem. I'm more worried about _Java_ code bloat. This is not a major C++-specific problem. > If a programming task is essentially file manipulation I'll use awk. If > the job is moderately complex and can be written in ANSI C I'll use that. > If an OO approach is called for I'll use Java and, if some fiddling is > required that Java can't do, I'll use a combination of C and Java with > sockets for inter-language data transfer. > > I probably wouldn't resort to C as quickly as you do, but my general philosophy - given free rein - is not way different. I certainly don't see Java as the go-to language for everything...and some people do. I say "given free rein" because most of the time it's not possible to use the best language on a real job, for various reasons. If I had to nominate *one* programming language that I think is #1 all-time, awk (and some variants) would be my choice. AHS -- When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift