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

Bjarne Stroustrup Quotes

stroustrup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 173 posts

Re: Bjarne Stroustrup Quotes

#21

Post by k__ »

chubot wrote: post #9

Language design is a curious mixture of grand ideas and fiddly details I hadn't heard this last one before, but it's SO right ... I always wondered why JS and PHP and Perl got so many details "wrong" (e.g. with Perl, one definition of "wrong" is that Perl 6 / Raku didn't make the same design choice) Turns out there's an avalanche of details, and they interact in many ways! Python did better, but I strongly argue both…

Languages have trends too.

Weak typing/Implicit conversion was cool in the 90s.

JS and PHP would have magnitudes better if they were typed like Python, but that's history.

Re: Bjarne Stroustrup Quotes

#22

Post by [deleted] »

gautamcgoel wrote: post #17
chubot wrote: post #9

Language design is a curious mixture of grand ideas and fiddly details I hadn't heard this last one before, but it's SO right ... I always wondered why JS and PHP and Perl got so many details "wrong" (e.g. with Perl, one definition of "wrong" is that Perl 6 / Raku didn't make the same design choice) Turns out there's an avalanche of details, and they interact in many ways! Python did better, but I strongly argue both…

Can you explain how you think strings should work?

[deleted]

Re: Bjarne Stroustrup Quotes

#24

Post by lmedinas »

"There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses".

He is right on this one. Pretty much in every discussion about Programming Languages people write how good Rust is and complain about how bad C++ is but the reality is, C++ it's one of the most used languages in the world.

This quote could be a very harsh reply to Rust vs C++.

Re: Bjarne Stroustrup Quotes

#25

Post by [deleted] »

k__ wrote: post #21
chubot wrote: post #9

Language design is a curious mixture of grand ideas and fiddly details I hadn't heard this last one before, but it's SO right ... I always wondered why JS and PHP and Perl got so many details "wrong" (e.g. with Perl, one definition of "wrong" is that Perl 6 / Raku didn't make the same design choice) Turns out there's an avalanche of details, and they interact in many ways! Python did better, but I strongly argue both…

Languages have trends too. Weak typing/Implicit conversion was cool in the 90s. JS and PHP would have magnitudes better if they were typed like Python, but that's history.

[deleted]

Re: Bjarne Stroustrup Quotes

#26

Post by tsimionescu »

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #12
koolba wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C++ is not backwards compatible with C. It’s mostly compatible, but it’s not completely compatible like say Objective C which is a strict superset of C.

honestly, no one cares about splitting that hair. Most valid C programs will compile in C++ and believe it or not, binary logic is not the only logic humans are capable of.

Almost every C program does `int *c = malloc(sizeof(int) *10)` or similar, which has always been invalid C++.

Re: Bjarne Stroustrup Quotes

#28

Post by ChrisSD »

lmedinas wrote: post #24

"There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses". He is right on this one. Pretty much in every discussion about Programming Languages people write how good Rust is and complain about how bad C++ is but the reality is, C++ it's one of the most used languages in the world. This quote could be a very harsh reply to Rust vs C++.

If you think nobody complains about Rust then you haven't visited HN much recently ;). Heck, Bjarne Stroustrup himself has recently taken to complaining about Rust in papers and talks (though most recently he's taken to referring to it without naming names).

Re: Bjarne Stroustrup Quotes

#29

Post by sgift »

lmedinas wrote: post #24

"There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses". He is right on this one. Pretty much in every discussion about Programming Languages people write how good Rust is and complain about how bad C++ is but the reality is, C++ it's one of the most used languages in the world. This quote could be a very harsh reply to Rust vs C++.

No, it could be a very stupid reply to Rust vs C++ since people do write in Rust. Bigger programs get written in it all the time and - what a surprise - people who use it have things they are annoyed about, which is why it gets improved.

To me this is one of the most stupid things he's ever uttered on one hand and the most useful one on the other. Cause it can be used to remind people that there's always trade-offs, which is a good thing if a discussion gets a bit too heated and "I am right!" "No, I am right!", but it can also be used, and most often is, as a very shallow and arrogant dismissal - funny enough, especially by C++ zealots, IME - of someone trying to fix some things. As if trying to do things better is somehow an affront to their greatness.

Re: Bjarne Stroustrup Quotes

#30

Post by sgift »

fosforsvenne wrote: post #27
getpost wrote: post #20

I'll see you Bjarne Stroustrup, and raise you Alan Kay, "Actually I made up the term "object-oriented", and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind." https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alan_Kay

Bjarne didn't have Alan in mind when designing C++ either.

If he had, we would all be better off.
Post reply on HN