Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges"

From	Manfred <noname@add.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges"
Date	2022-04-28 23:57 +0200
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<t4f2kn$13dg$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<t47rhm$1v44$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t48d7a$u9o$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t48epq$rh4$1@dont-email.me> <t4anus$rea$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/27/2022 8:30 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> Alf P. Steinbach <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The Ranges library adds not just an new huge API but another large
>> domain specific language which results in very brittle code, and huge
>> complexity, that maintenance programmers must deal with.
> 
> Ok, let me put it this way:
> 
> The ranges library is just that: A library. It's not part of the language
> syntax itself. It's not making C++ "more complicated" because it's not
> changing the C++ language itself. It's simply an ancillary auxiliary
> library.
> 
> You treat these new standard libraries as if they made the language more
> complicated and complex because from now forward you will have to encounter
> C++ code that uses this library, meaning you will need to know what this
> library is doing if you want to undrestand that code.

But in fact they do make the language more complicated and complex, 
simply because they get into the standard, and make it fatter and heavier.
The argument about "if you don't want it you are free to ignore it" does 
not really apply once it gets into the standard, which means that these 
features start pouring into code, even if by misuse, just because they 
do become part of the language.

There are already examples of this: Java and .NET are are probably the 
most obvious ones. Them being so bloated should be reason enough to 
consider if it is really needed to make C++ as fat as the Vasa (TM)

> 
> What you aren't considering is this: How is that different from programs
> that use third-party libraries? There are very few C++ programs out there
> that don't use *any* third-party libraries. A few programs may get away
> with not using any (especially now that the standard library supports
> more than it did before, eg. <filesystem> and <thread>), but those are
> the minority. The larger the program, the more likely it's using some
> third-party library.

Third party libraries are substantially different: since they are not 
part of the language, they get through a selection process by the 
developer or the team, which ensure that their benefit pays for their 
cost, including the cost of added complexity.

> 
> That means that if you ever need to understand what the program is doing
> (eg. to maintain it), you'll need to study how that third-party library
> is used and how it works. (What's worse is that the "third-party library"
> might be completely unique, ie. having been created by the author of the
> program exclusively for that program, meaning there's zero chance you have
> ever encountered it before.)
> 
> How is that different from having to find out how, for example, the
> standard ranges library is used and how it works?
> 
> Well, I can tell you one big difference: Once you learn it you'll be able
> to understand a whole lot of more C++ programs out there, if and ostensibly
> when they start using it. With third-party libraries it's quite likely
> you have never even heard of it, so every time you encounter one you'll
> need to start learning from scratch.
> 
> Thus, there is quite a clear advantage in adding something to the standard
> library: The more programs start using it, the less learning you'll have
> to do in order to understand a C++ program.

Thread

"Performance of C++20's Ranges" Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2022-04-26 01:13 -0300
  Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-26 09:15 +0000
    Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-26 09:27 +0000
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-04-26 16:29 +0200
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 18:45 -0700
    Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2022-04-26 11:42 +0200
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-26 11:11 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2022-04-26 13:31 +0200
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-04-26 06:46 -0700
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 08:20 +0000
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-27 08:40 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 15:12 +0000
              Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-04-27 16:09 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 16:21 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-04-29 16:15 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-30 16:00 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 19:03 +0200
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-04-27 11:12 -0400
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-28 06:45 +0000
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-27 06:30 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-04-28 23:57 +0200
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-29 06:07 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-04-29 16:28 -0700
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-02 05:01 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-05-10 07:36 -0700
    Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-04-26 11:28 -0400
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-04-26 18:13 +0200
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-26 16:24 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-04-26 12:48 -0400
    Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2022-04-26 20:20 -0300
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 08:30 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-27 08:50 +0000
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 05:12 -0700
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 15:18 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 18:56 +0200
              Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 08:40 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-04-28 13:54 +0300
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 13:11 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:25 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 17:30 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:45 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 17:52 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:57 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 18:01 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 16:06 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 18:09 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 16:14 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 16:11 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 16:20 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-29 09:31 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:15 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 13:07 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:17 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 17:31 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:50 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 17:55 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:59 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 18:02 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 16:13 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 18:20 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-29 09:27 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-29 20:48 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 07:34 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-04-30 17:31 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 20:30 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-05-01 15:20 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 18:18 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-05-01 16:25 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-05-01 23:14 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 18:52 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-04-28 18:21 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-29 09:29 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-04-28 18:19 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 21:01 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 16:07 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:22 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-28 10:57 +0000
              Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:27 +0000
              Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2022-04-28 09:26 -0700
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 17:07 +0200
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 15:54 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 18:35 +0200

csiph-web