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

Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

izzys.casa

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 251 posts

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#231

Post by bluGill »

Olumde wrote: post #217
ncmncm wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hint: HR is not your friend. HR's primary job, overriding all its other jobs, is to spy on you on behalf of corporate. Second is to save the company money on lawsuit payouts. The only saving grace is that, sometimes, a low-level HR functionary has not got the memo that this is their primary job, and might actually do something helpful. The primary job of the Director of HR, an the other hand, is always simple corrupt…

Seriously worth repeating. HR is NOT your friend. I learnt this the hard way. HR's core function is to protect the company from litigation by employees. The HR management is highly unlikely to side with you against upper management no matter how much you are in the right.

If it is about upper management you might be right. However if it is about anyone lower then their job is to prevent lawsuits and so they are on your side - this time - because it is the best way to do their job.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#232

Post by einpoklum »

tialaramex wrote: post #218
13415 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Java was also largely successful, by now it's the new Cobol of business software and will never go away. The same for C++, of course, it will not go anywhere, at worst it will slide a few points down the TIOBE index (where, surprisingly, Visual Basic is on place 6).

I believe that - without any of them explicitly saying so and perhaps even without them consciously understanding what they were doing - the C++ 20 standards committee actually settled on C++ priorities and set backwards compatibility as inviolable priority #1. It won't go anywhere. But that's including forwards .

You are _way_ overstating your case.

For those who are not familiar with C++, the past ~12 years have seen _massive_ changes to the language, the standard library and the surrounding ecosystem. Yes, old programs still run, but they are simply not what you would write today nor how you would write today.

In fact, the C++20 changes are so significant that it will take years for developers to even transition to utilizing them, like it took years for C++11 to be more-or-less widely adopted.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#233

Post by coddle-hark »

notacoward wrote: post #191
coddle-hark wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s xe/xyr according to the linked Twitter profile.

I stand corrected. The first source I found was https://cppcast.com/guest/imuerte/ which uses she/her. I guess it has changed over time. In either case, male pronouns (or "this guy" in one still-extant comment) are incorrect and seem like the result of stereotyping or opposition to modern gender reality.

Your use of she/her seems like the result of stereotyping trans people.

Everybody loses when we play this game. You can’t expect people to hunt down the preferred pronouns of everyone that writes an article before discussing said article. Your comment is no more substantive than comments correcting spelling or grammar, it’s just noise and doesn’t contribute to the discussion.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#234

Post by tialaramex »

einpoklum wrote: post #232
tialaramex wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that - without any of them explicitly saying so and perhaps even without them consciously understanding what they were doing - the C++ 20 standards committee actually settled on C++ priorities and set backwards compatibility as inviolable priority #1. It won't go anywhere. But that's including forwards .

You are _way_ overstating your case. For those who are not familiar with C++, the past ~12 years have seen _massive_ changes to the language, the standard library and the surrounding ecosystem. Yes, old programs still run, but they are simply not what you would write today nor how you would write today. In fact, the C++20 changes are so significant that it will take years for developers to even transition to utilizin…

Of course they're adding things to C++. They've been adding things to C++ for decades. I don't anticipate that slowing down for many years if ever. Watch Herb Sutter talking about the question of whether C++ is "finished" a few months back. Bjarne wants Unified Functional Call Syntax, which is the sort of crazy "automatic foot-shotgun" feature that C++ deserves and will fit right in†. Herb wants a pattern matching syntax which of course also de-structures, has overloadable typecasting and includes dynamic type ID as well because this is C++. There's no shortage of additions to C++

But C++ is too complicated and too unsafe. The only way to actually fix that would be to face the monster and slim down C++ and that would threaten backwards compatibility and thus can't be countenanced any more. In that same talk Herb talks about these big problems, claiming he's going to address them. But what he actually does is a sleight of hand trick. He redefines the problem. C++ isn't too complicated it lacks extra features that would make it more orthogonal. So adding yet more stuff to it will fix that. C++ isn't too unsafe it's just too easy to get things wrong, adding yet more stuff will avoid that.

Nobody should be convinced by this hogwash.

† UFCS says foo(a, b) and a.foo(b) are the same thing. In Rust you get one half of this coin, you can call any function at all as a free function, if you can write a.foo(b) there's a (verbose and usually not idiomatic) way to write foo(a,b) instead with the same effect. But you can't do the reverse because it would break a lot of Rust assumptions. In C++ today in most places you need to know whether to write foo(a, b) or a.foo(b) because only one of them will work.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#235

Post by notacoward »

coddle-hark wrote: post #233
notacoward wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stand corrected. The first source I found was https://cppcast.com/guest/imuerte/ which uses she/her. I guess it has changed over time. In either case, male pronouns (or "this guy" in one still-extant comment) are incorrect and seem like the result of stereotyping or opposition to modern gender reality.

Your use of she/her seems like the result of stereotyping trans people. Everybody loses when we play this game. You can’t expect people to hunt down the preferred pronouns of everyone that writes an article before discussing said article. Your comment is no more substantive than comments correcting spelling or grammar, it’s just noise and doesn’t contribute to the discussion.

> You can’t expect people to hunt down the preferred pronouns of everyone that writes

No, but I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect they'll look at the name at the bottom of the article and use the most likely matching pronouns instead of assuming male because it's tech. If that turns out to be incorrect at least it's an honest mistake, not a stereotype. "You can't expect" is just an excuse for not making any attempt to respect people's wishes in this regard, and IMO counts as transphobia.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#236

Post by oconnor0 »

pyjarrett wrote: post #208
ncmncm wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BTW, there is no language named ADA.

We should cut people some slack about this, especially considering that the language itself is case insensitive :P I'm not sure what actually triggers the confusion about this, but it is Ada, not ADA. It's not an acronym, I'm curious about the origin of the incorrect all caps version, but it seems like there's a forgotten historical reason for this.

Ada came out of the DOD so assuming it's an all-caps acronym makes a lot of sense. ;)

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#237

Post by gjgfdd »

coddle-hark wrote: post #185
notacoward wrote: post #62

FYI: the author is named Isabella and AFAICT uses female pronouns. In light of that, the amount of "he" and "him" in the comments so far seems a bit excessive. EDIT: it looks like a lot of those comments have been cleaned up or deleted since I first made this comment. Thank you.

It’s xe/xyr according to the linked Twitter profile.

What a joke

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#239

Post by lenkite »

pyjarrett wrote: post #75

> So what is out there for me, if not C++ or Rust? Ada. I write C++ professionally and used Rust for about a year, but don't use it anymore. In many ways, Ada feels like a much simpler implementation of the C++ feature set. The language lets you focus on intent, while still having a lot of control. Yes, Ada's still alive and kicking, it has a package manager, documentation generator, parsing/semantic analysis library…

Does Ada compile for mobile platforms (Android/iOS/etc) ? Does Ada support lambdas ? (can't find this)

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#240

Post by lenkite »

einpoklum wrote: post #232
tialaramex wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that - without any of them explicitly saying so and perhaps even without them consciously understanding what they were doing - the C++ 20 standards committee actually settled on C++ priorities and set backwards compatibility as inviolable priority #1. It won't go anywhere. But that's including forwards .

You are _way_ overstating your case. For those who are not familiar with C++, the past ~12 years have seen _massive_ changes to the language, the standard library and the surrounding ecosystem. Yes, old programs still run, but they are simply not what you would write today nor how you would write today. In fact, the C++20 changes are so significant that it will take years for developers to even transition to utilizin…

Without the ability to break ABI, the C++ standard library is dead.

"The Day The Standard Library Died" https://cor3ntin.github.io/posts/abi/

C++ ABI is also a joke. You can neither take advantage of it nor avoid it. Why have an ABI then ?

Post reply on HN