Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linus vs C++, again

realworldtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 209 posts

Re: Linus vs C++, again

#111

Post by wvenable »

rpledge wrote: post #4

Linus has a touch of what I think makes Steve Jobs great: the ability to say no and stick by those convictions. No argument from me that Linux is wildly successful and one of the most important tech developments in the last 10 years. However, I always cringe when I read some of his comments that seem to reject any element of forward progress. While C++ certainly has its share of issues, Linux will never evolve if the…

I'd like to see Linus tackle a systems programming language now that he's tackled version control. I'd think that would be entirely within his domain.

But C++ is not the answer here. It wants to be all things to everyone (low-level, high-level, object-oriented, functional, etc, etc) and is therefore useful for almost every kind of project but well matched to none of them.

Re: Linus vs C++, again

#112

Post by eru »

jrockway wrote: post #17
rpledge wrote: post #4

Linus has a touch of what I think makes Steve Jobs great: the ability to say no and stick by those convictions. No argument from me that Linux is wildly successful and one of the most important tech developments in the last 10 years. However, I always cringe when I read some of his comments that seem to reject any element of forward progress. While C++ certainly has its share of issues, Linux will never evolve if the…

If C is 1960, C++ is 1961. It'd be nice to join the 21st century, or even 1980.

C++ is from the early 1980ies. (That doesn't make it a better language, though.)

Re: Linus vs C++, again

#113

Post by rpledge »

hristov wrote: post #43
rpledge wrote: post #4

Linus has a touch of what I think makes Steve Jobs great: the ability to say no and stick by those convictions. No argument from me that Linux is wildly successful and one of the most important tech developments in the last 10 years. However, I always cringe when I read some of his comments that seem to reject any element of forward progress. While C++ certainly has its share of issues, Linux will never evolve if the…

It is very silly to say that something is bad because it started a long time ago. I do not see how any of the modern languages of the 21th century would be even remotely suitable to write an OS kernel with. Considering that most of those languages are at least partially interpreted and require GCs, a kernel written in them would be painfully slow. Just because something is old does not mean it is worse, and just beca…

The counter arguement would be that it is silly to reject sonething because it is new. I've written. Lots of C++ to test SOCs at a lower level than the linux kernel. Discounting OOP techniques because of complexities in C++ is shortsighted.

Re: Linus vs C++, again

#114

Post by nitrogen »

rpledge wrote: post #34
desponsible wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Linux will never evolve Do you terribly mind elaborating on this rather bold statement?

Great way to edit my comment, what I actually said was: > Linux will never evolve if the programming paradigm stays in the 60s C is a great language, but I firmly believe that OOP creates more maintainable code that is more robust. Sure, a simple C program is easy to understand, but the kernel isn't an easy program. Don't get me wrong, C++ has major downsides, but C isn't a magic bullet.

The kernel does use object-oriented paradigms.

Re: Linus vs C++, again

#115

Post by eru »

snorkel wrote: post #65

Even if the Linux kernel were rewritten in Erlang and it won't change the fact the vast majority of *NIX systems level code is entrenched in C. The most popular LAMP stack ingredients are also written in C. Face it; it's a good language.

Non sequitur?

Re: Linus vs C++, again

#116

Post by eru »

MarkPNeyer wrote: post #5

C as a context free language? Bullshit. How many global variables are there? How many functions with ridiculous names like htons? Edit: I realize that "context free language" was a poor choice of words; i meant it in the sense that linus did - his claim that you can 'look at a piece of code and understand what it does' is laughable in the face of accepted c programming styles.

Yes. C and C++ are about equally bad in their usage of side-effects.

Re: Linus vs C++, again

#117

Post by joe_the_user »

martincmartin wrote: post #60
cageface wrote: post #9

As I get older and grumpier I tend to appreciate Linus' point of view more and more. It's easy to get swept up by arguments of the expressiveness of a language, particularly in small examples. However, I think in the long run it's better to have very explicit code. The less jumping around and inference I have to do to figure out what a block of code does the more likely it is that I understand it and that I can quick…

How do you explain the success of ActiveRecord? Do you think it's illusory? The exception that proves the rule? Something else? http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2009/07/13/ending-the-... "The fact that it took decades for the industry to arrive at something as useful as ActiveRecord in Rails is due primarily to the attitude that some language features [in this case, meta-programming] are just too powerful for ev…

If the kernel was written to the common standards of Ruby code, it would come apart completely.

-- > That doesn't mean Ruby is bad. Ruby is great. ActiveRecord is a great model for MVC web development. The standards of Ruby aren't good for more performance-oriented, "hard core" development - Ruby's a pretty mature language but Rubinius, the Ruby-in-Ruby project still isn't production-level. One might guess that compilers/interpreters require a different standard than web frameworks. Neither is bad though (writing a website in c/c++ would be onerous).

If the space shuttle code was written accord to the standards of Linux code, it would come apart completely too.

It's shame that Linus had to frame things as good language versus bad when it's a matter of the right tool for the right job.

Still, the proofs in the pudding and anyone who can write a kernel in C++ or Ruby would sure give those languages a boost (and these are the languages I like best).

Re: Linus vs C++, again

#118

Post by mikeklaas »

desponsible wrote: post #11

> One of the absolute worst features of C++ is how it makes a lot of things so context-dependent - which just means that when you look at the code, a local view simply seldom gives enough context to know what is going on. Good point. Very good point. Having spent few years developing for the Linux kernel I can say that the most cluttered code I dealt with was the network stack. And exactly because it was done in C++-…

I think your example proves that it is how features are used, not the mere fact of the possibility for use in a language, that creates the problems linus refers to.

Re: Linus vs C++, again

#120

Post by albertzeyer »

mojuba wrote: post #31
cageface wrote: post #9

As I get older and grumpier I tend to appreciate Linus' point of view more and more. It's easy to get swept up by arguments of the expressiveness of a language, particularly in small examples. However, I think in the long run it's better to have very explicit code. The less jumping around and inference I have to do to figure out what a block of code does the more likely it is that I understand it and that I can quick…

write(fd, buf, size); Can you list all the caveats, possible side effects, reasons of failure of this simple C function call? Hint: remember, fd can be a file, as well as a NFS-mounted file, pipe, network or local socket, FIFO, device, etc. Hint2: I doubt anyone can give a comprehensive description of the possible consequences of this call. Bottom line being, C can be incredibly hard to understand, or C++ can be clea…

I can show you a lot more awful looking C code than awful looking C++ code.

Edit: Well, seems you don't believe it.

Take a look here: http://www.google.com/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=lang:c%...

And here: http://www.google.com/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=lang:c+...

Just browse a bit through both, check a few different projects. Check also some of the big projects. (Apache, GCC, glibc, Linux, LLVM, clang, WebKit, Chromium, etc.)

Post reply on HN