Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++ • Hacker News Board

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#381

Post by LorenDB » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 1:33 AM UTC

chc wrote: post #340

detaro wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you are misunderstanding their point. If the problem of using Qt from D is that you need the MOC, then the fact that you can work around the need for MOC and use Qt without it seems quite relevant?

The initial complaint was that it did not have "good support." I think it is fair to say that having to spend a significant amount of effort to work around a lack of support is not "good support."

Indeed, that is what I meant. I would like to see Qt allow some sort of language-abstracted moc so I can just install Qt and a set of Qt bindings and then use them. Just because I can work around the moc doesn't mean that I can easily and productively use Qt from D.

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#382

Post by a9h74j » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 1:56 AM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #236

mempko wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with C++ is it keeps getting better. There was a time when Rust was interesting to me but then C++11 came out. Then they kept improving it

C++11 was where C++ lost me, and I went from saying I knew C/C++ to saying I know C.

Precisely.

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#383

Post by n4jm4 » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 1:57 AM UTC

Rust is good enough for HFT, Web rendering, and the Linux kernel but go ahead and add Carbon to the massive list of been-there-done-that.

Pro tip: Don't try to migrate an entire catalog of functions all at once to Rust (or pick your favorite C++ alternative). Pluck off individual pieces and use FFI to bridge the gap. Remember, work incrementally.

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#384

Post by mbrodersen » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 2:01 AM UTC

Sebb767 wrote: post #72

cogman10 wrote: post #21

If you are like me and wondering "What makes carbon different from Rust or Zig? 1. The ability to interoperate with a wide variety of code, such as classes/structs and templates, not just free functions. 2. A willingness to expose the idioms of C++ into Carbon code, and the other way around, when necessary to maximize performance of the interoperability layer. 3. The use of wrappers and generic programming, including…

The syntax looks a lot like Rust, though. I'm surprised they made such a break when there explicit goal is to make migration from C++ as easy as possible. Also, Rust (from my biased point of view) is currently on its way to become the standard low-level language, so I'm not too confident that Rust-but-with-OO is enough of a selling point.

> on its way to become the standard low-level language

It will take a very long time for Rust to get even close to the huge amount of C++ code out there. There are more than 5 million professional C++ developers employed around the world today. And that number is increasing. Don’t get me wrong: I like Rust and other attempts to move beyond C++. But don’t underestimate how much C++ code has been written the last 30+ years. And new C++ projects are started every single day. There are probably more C++ projects started every day than Rust projects. So anything that makes it possible to move beyond C++ while being 100% interoperable is good news.

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#385

Post by miffy900 » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 2:02 AM UTC

Maursault wrote: post #365

Why "Carbon?" I just want to known if I a missing something subtle... or if it is just C, the symbol for carbon. Developers need better and unique names for their products. I realize no one will care because no one is using it anymore, but Carbon was already taken by Apple for their Objective C API.[1] That both are pretty much in the same space with the same name is sure not to cause any confusion. [1] https://en.wi…

The Carbon API has been obsolete for years now; there's probably no danger of anyone getting confused when they search on Stackoverflow or Google.

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#386

Post by mbrodersen » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 2:04 AM UTC

fouronnes3 wrote: post #134

mempko wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with C++ is it keeps getting better. There was a time when Rust was interesting to me but then C++11 came out. Then they kept improving it

C++ has virtually zero tooling and the committee is not interested in ever working on that. Comparing CMake to cargo is like comparing fifth century fireworks to the Space Shuttle. I mean we are getting modules that aren't literally copy paste maybe next year.

Hahaha you have zero clue. C++ has the best tooling in the world. From static analysers to best in class debuggers to best in class performance profiling tools etc. No other language comes even close.

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#387

Post by zozbot234 » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 2:05 AM UTC

mbrodersen wrote: post #384

Sebb767 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The syntax looks a lot like Rust, though. I'm surprised they made such a break when there explicit goal is to make migration from C++ as easy as possible. Also, Rust (from my biased point of view) is currently on its way to become the standard low-level language, so I'm not too confident that Rust-but-with-OO is enough of a selling point.

> on its way to become the standard low-level language It will take a very long time for Rust to get even close to the huge amount of C++ code out there. There are more than 5 million professional C++ developers employed around the world today. And that number is increasing . Don’t get me wrong: I like Rust and other attempts to move beyond C++. But don’t underestimate how much C++ code has been written the last 30+…

Carbon is not trying to be 100% interoperable with C++. It's trying for some fuzzy notion of "good enough" - that's really not very different from what Rust is trying to do with cxx-rs. Yes there are serious challenges and I've described them here, but they're not impossible to address while staying with Rust.

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#388

Post by deterministic » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 2:09 AM UTC

mihaigalos wrote: post #153

mempko wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with C++ is it keeps getting better. There was a time when Rust was interesting to me but then C++11 came out. Then they kept improving it

As far as I'm concerned, C++ is there for legacy purposes only. There are some nice frameworks and tools using it, sure. Yes, you are required to learn it if you are studying CS. Any serious new development today is done using more modern languages such as Rust (i.e.: the linkerd service mesh proxy [1] for encrypted pod communication in a k8s cluster). As even the Linux kernel is slowly transitioning to using Rust [2…

Hahaha wow. There are more than 5 million C++ programmers out there. Starting new C++ projects every day. I am pretty sure more new C++ projects are started every day than Rust projects. Everything (including Rust) runs on top of browsers/operating systems/drivers/compilers/VMs written in C/C++. Rust code is like a drop in the ocean compared. Maybe in 30 years that will changed? Don’t count on it.

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#389

Post by deterministic » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 2:10 AM UTC

xoac wrote: post #222

pjmlp wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess, unless you're into retro-gaming.

I mean a lot of these things rely on copying old code. AFAIK a lot of new games in bigger studios start by essentially copying the old engine into a new tree.

Nope. Ex. game developer here. New C++ projects and libraries are started every single day.

Re: Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++

#390

Post by mbrodersen » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 2:13 AM UTC

tempest_ wrote: post #263

fancyfredbot wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My impression as a CS grad is that very few computer science courses require you to learn C++.

It really depends on what bit of computer science you are learning. C++ is definitely past its prime and has been surpassed in many areas by other languages but there are still a bunch of domains where it is the primary language.

How about almost all domains? Everything in the world runs on top of browsers/operating systems/drivers/VMs/networks/embedded systems etc. that are written in C/C++. Not to mention that the tools used to design chips and manufacture them are also written in C/C++. No other language comes even close.