111–120 of 251 posts
Quoted post unavailable.
I read the whole article before posting my comment (which is currently top voted, at least it looks like that to me, so maybe that's what you're objecting to). It's quite possible I've missed something, or a lot of things, but your comment isn't helpful determining that... You just said to read the whole thing again. Ok, but what specifically have I got wrong?
Quoted post unavailable.
Oh, if I were invested in C++ I would be worried! And it sounds like the committee members should have some takeaways, for sure. But I'm not a member of that community. Bringing up one problem (C++ committee interaction) doesn't mean that is the only problem that was brought up. She has trouble communicating because she's very scrupulous, same as lots of other engineers - some people are responding to that problem. S…
Also, from a language design point of view, they have very strong opinions about language design and heavily criticize the design of all modern languages. That shouldn't be surprising to anyone. Programming language design is a field of CS. People are allowed to obsess over it. It'd be a shit world of people didn't obsess over specific fields of science. I can't believe I have to explain this.
The people here aren't arguing with the statements about language, but instead for the author even having opinions about languages at all. That's incredibly demeaning and dismissive.
> A lack of default arguments, a lack of basic arity overloading, a lack of variadic generics, all make me not want to write Rust. I'm sorry but these are such superficial problems. I don't need overloading (arity or otherwise) since Rust kind of has overloading thanks to the traits. Variadic generics might be necessary since C++ doesn't have a good macro system. But Rust does so you achieve it that way.
Rust has an abysmal macro system that cannot be properly tooled for.
It could be argued that "functions" are a form of programming language extension that are friendlier to tools. For programming-language fascinated beginners, this could be a good way of motivating "functions" as a language feature.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read the whole article before posting my comment (which is currently top voted, at least it looks like that to me, so maybe that's what you're objecting to). It's quite possible I've missed something, or a lot of things, but your comment isn't helpful determining that... You just said to read the whole thing again. Ok, but what specifically have I got wrong?
What gave you the impression I was directly referring to your comment?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What gave you the impression I was directly referring to your comment?
Well, nothing in your comment gave me the impression you were referring to anything in particular. But I was honestly trying to understand what your point was. Really, it just comes across as unspecific rant, so I think I was being pretty generous.
I have quite a few comments here pointing that out to people. If you didn't get much worth out of my comment, or if it was obvious, perhaps you weren't the intended reader.
Quoted post unavailable.
I read the whole article before posting my comment (which is currently top voted, at least it looks like that to me, so maybe that's what you're objecting to). It's quite possible I've missed something, or a lot of things, but your comment isn't helpful determining that... You just said to read the whole thing again. Ok, but what specifically have I got wrong?
The bigger issue with your comment from my perspective though is that you said "But it seems to me that they're still some way off from understanding their condition", which to my ears is just demeaning. Someone posts an article about leaving a community, with a lead in explaining their state of mind as of writing it, and your response comes down to "sounds like you don't understand your condition you were recently diagnosed with".
Personality disorders are hard, they don't go away and they can take years to get a handle on. When the top response to your article where you mention your disorder is someone saying you don't understand it, it becomes that much harder.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust has an abysmal macro system that cannot be properly tooled for.
I guess this is why macros aren't the be-all end-all solution to problems in language design: It's difficult to construct tooling around them. It could be argued that "functions" are a form of programming language extension that are friendlier to tools. For programming-language fascinated beginners, this could be a good way of motivating "functions" as a language feature.
In the end there is really no alternative, in fact there is none. I could not find a language to replace c++ myself in practice, so I will keep using it all the way.
> A lack of default arguments, a lack of basic arity overloading, a lack of variadic generics, all make me not want to write Rust. I'm sorry but these are such superficial problems. I don't need overloading (arity or otherwise) since Rust kind of has overloading thanks to the traits. Variadic generics might be necessary since C++ doesn't have a good macro system. But Rust does so you achieve it that way.
I met Izzy a few times at cppcon and always came away impressed. I have basically the same thoughts about the c++ community -- it burns people out and it's filled with a ton of negativity and ego and it's very hard to get anything done. While I was at Google I spent some time trying to push for some sort of codes of conduct after a colleague of mine had a reasonable proposal ripped to shreds in email groups with all…
Persons who are vocally against CoCs can very well be on your side regarding sexist remarks. Personal attacks are difficult to quantify. Often they are a last resort for shutting up someone who thinks they should dictate everything in a code base, even if it is outside their area of expertise.
Perhaps Google's C++ code base is too mission critical to let it be ruined?