|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Because there is really nothing else for low-level high-performance software.
But that's what they're asking. Why is there nothing else?
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin McFarlane wrote: Why is there nothing else?
If you look at the languages that were marketed as "the C++ replacement": Java, C#, D, you'll see that they are higher-level productivity languages - replacement for VB maybe, but not for C++. The only new language I am aware of that may be targeting the same niche as C++ is Rust, but it is not stable yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: If you look at the languages that were marketed as "the C++ replacement": Java, C#, D, you'll see that they are higher-level productivity languages
But author is not discussing those (apart from D, which is low-level, not sure why you think it isn't) but mainly D, Rust and Go.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
Well, D and Go are really not low level enough to be a replacement for C++. Rust may be, but is not ready.
|
|
|
|
|
So we need to wait for Double-D ?
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Rust
Not sure I should trust a language name "Rust", somehow makes me think the code will rot.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Because the devil is in the details. And when you look to create something that replaces C++, you inevitably land, head first, into the nastiness that C++ rather admirably handles.
"Replacing C++ with something clean" looks great on a whiteboard. But, in practice, it's impossible. You can't retain the advantage of being that close to the system without exposing the underlying implementation.
|
|
|
|
|
mikepwilson wrote: "Replacing C++ with something clean" looks great on a whiteboard. But, in practice, it's impossible. You can't retain the advantage of being that close to the system without exposing the underlying implementation.
That's the kind of answer I was looking for. 
The way I would look at it is that C++ is the language you turn to where "if you can't do it in anything else, you can do it in C++."
Whereas, for a language like Eiffel you would use it for applications where "nothing else will do."
It doesn't mean that you wouldn't use those languages more widely but that the above define the sweet spots.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
Assembly language?
Or Forth
|
|
|
|
|
Don't. You're making me wistful for my Forth days.
|
|
|
|
|
What about D?
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
While D is good in many of the spots where C++ is appropriate - the choice of GC by default means that it is unsuited to areas with hard realtime or space requirements.
It is possible to avoid this, but loses many of the benefits of D.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm working on a new language I am going to call C##. 
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Careful with that - it looks sharp.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
As any musician will tell you, that is D.
|
|
|
|
|
Nah! Someone's already done "D". I'm basing mine on FORTRAN!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Forogar wrote: FORTRAN
So, F#
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: So, F#
Noooooooooooooooooo! Wash your mouth out with SOAP!
FORTRAN (always in CAPS) is more like FƄ (F-flat).
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Blogger is basically wrong. His assumption that one kind (family?) of languages is good for anything is the root problem when a project fails...
So compare C++ with F# is as bad as you can get it! All these languages have their advantages on different level and different fields, but you can't replace one with the other like switching socks... Telling that OO design is dead, just because we have more projects that point toward AI that has nothing with the strict frames of OO is so childish that I should smile over if it wasn't about misleading the upcoming generation...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: Blogger is basically wrong.
Aren't they all? 
Of course you're right; saying that one language should be able to rule them all is just as wrong as the other post saying more languages are required. 
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
As we settle into a roughly bi-annual schedule for our programming language rankings, it is now time for the second drop of the year. For those who pick their programming language by popularity
|
|
|
|
|
The outliers on the graph are interesting - I can see that SQL and XML would appear in stackoverflow more often than github .. they are typically a small (troublesome) part of a project but why is "Common Lisp" so much more prevalent on GitHub than StackOverflow?
|
|
|
|
|
Duncan Edwards Jones wrote: why is "Common Lisp" so much more prevalent on GitHub than StackOverflow?
My guess is its use in university projects (by students more advanced than those in Q&A or StackOverflow).
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Duncan Edwards Jones wrote: why is "Common Lisp" so much more prevalent on GitHub than StackOverflow?
Any real lisper would answer that it is because Lisp is so logical and easy that there is no need to ask any questions once you adopt it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
