Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
linkedin.com
Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
1–10 of 264 posts
Re: Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
#2This sounds like it's written from the point of view of implementing something inhouse. I fail to see how FPGA programming will be relevant if one wants to distribute software for consumers (or am I technologically clueless...).
Re: Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
#3This article is not very general. Much of what it tries to convince us is not going to matter for most developers, and has the cost of suggesting modern features are not good for any developers. For example:
>It is not rare to see Modern C++ applications taking 10 minutes to compile. With traditional C++, this number is counted in low seconds for a simple change.
This is simply a bogus statement with respect to what at least 90% of c++ developers do on a daily basis.
I have benchmarked unique_ptr, auto, brace initialization, lambdas, range-based-for and other modern idioms and found them all to be at least as fast, and often faster, than their older counterparts. Now, if I were to instead go off and write template-heavy code using new features, that would be different. But in reality, the vast majority of c++ developers -- I'd wager at least 95% -- are not writing variadic templates on a daily basis (nor should they be).
The memory safety and many benefits from unique_ptr [0] is one of many modern tools that is a non-brainer to use in nearly all contexts. No, not nearly all contexts, allow me to rephrase: all contexts. It just is, and if you compare its use to manual new/delete code, the benefits are solid and faster.
The author further claims that modern C++ is less maintainable and more complex. The absolute opposite is true in nearly all cases. Using unique_ptr again as an example, it leads to less code, less complex code, more clear code, and better maintainability and code readability. Uniform brace initialization is another example that prevents many common older problems in the language.
FYI the author keeps talking about high frequency trading as an example of why modern c++ is a bad choice. Well, I worked at a HFT firm for a long time until last year, the firm places millions of trades per day and is among the most successful in the markets it trades. And what did we use? Only modern features. Lambdas, auto, unique_ptr, range-fors, even std::async -- everywhere in our code. This author is either naive or political.
I think the title of this article is highly misleading, and the contents are not relevant. Overall, this article is just bad advice for most of us.
Re: Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
#4This sounds like it's written from the point of view of implementing something inhouse. I fail to see how FPGA programming will be relevant if one wants to distribute software for consumers (or am I technologically clueless...).
According to the writer's LinkedIn profile, he comes from the world of High Frequency Trading. That's an area where performance is so important, that it might make sense to design your own hardware. And you certainly don't want to distribute it to anyone...
I do agree with the writer that with each release, C++ has become more and more complicated, seriously hurting the maintainability of C++ code.
Re: Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
#5This sounds like it's written from the point of view of implementing something inhouse. I fail to see how FPGA programming will be relevant if one wants to distribute software for consumers (or am I technologically clueless...).
Sounds like he is suffering from bias of the problem domain he is working on right now.
Re: Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
#6There are two separate rants here that aren't delineated well.
1) C++ is too complicated, and therefore hard to reason about and slow to compile.
We're going to argue about this forever, but you'll have to agree that the spec is very large and warty compared to other languages, and that C++ tends to take far longer to compile (this was already a problem a decade ago, it's not specific to "modern" C++).
2) The future of software development will include more of what I'm going to call ""non-isotropic"" software; rather than assuming a flat memory model and a single in-order execution unit, and exerting great effort to pretend that that's still the case, programmers will have to develop effectively on GPUs and reconfigurable hardware. Presumably this speculation is based on the Intel-Altera acquisition.
You can sort of do hardware programming in C (SystemC) but C++ is really not a good fit for hardware. Personally I'd like to see a cambrian explosion of HDLs, but the time is not yet right for that.
It sounds like the author favours the "C with classes" programming style, maybe including smart pointers, and is probably not keen on lambdaization of everything.
Re: Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
#7> If you cannot figure out in one minute what a C++ file is doing, assume the code is incorrect.
This statement at first resonated with me, and then I thought about it: this doesn't reduce the complexity of the overall application or service, it just means that one file is simple. You could have 10,000 files instead of 1 much shorter one; is that any more simple?
Re: Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
#8While some pretty good points were stated in this post, I cannot but feel OP is a bit biased. Too narrow sort to say.
I feel totally opposite in terms of new Modern C++. I guess the thing is how, where and when you use it will define your opinion/experience.
Re: Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
#9This article is not very general. Much of what it tries to convince us is not going to matter for most developers, and has the cost of suggesting modern features are not good for any developers. For example: >It is not rare to see Modern C++ applications taking 10 minutes to compile. With traditional C++, this number is counted in low seconds for a simple change. This is simply a bogus statement with respect to what…
I got the feeling that the author's beef with Modern C++ is the same as for any C++ that is template heavy. And to me it is not a new or unique experience (i.e. not limited to Modern C++) to have builds that take 45 minutes to build everything. It can happen in older code and in newer code.
Re: Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore
#10This article is not very general. Much of what it tries to convince us is not going to matter for most developers, and has the cost of suggesting modern features are not good for any developers. For example: >It is not rare to see Modern C++ applications taking 10 minutes to compile. With traditional C++, this number is counted in low seconds for a simple change. This is simply a bogus statement with respect to what…
I got the feeling that the author's beef with Modern C++ is the same as for any C++ that is template heavy. And to me it is not a new or unique experience (i.e. not limited to Modern C++) to have builds that take 45 minutes to build everything. It can happen in older code and in newer code.
Yes, templates make the compiler work harder (sometimes at least), but badly modularized code with "big ball of mud" dependency structure also makes the compiler work a lot. You don't need fancy features to do that.