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

C++: The Documentary

herbsutter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 334 posts

Re: C++: The Documentary

#31

Post by samiv »

flohofwoe wrote: post #25
jdw64 wrote: post #11

It's surprising that C++'s development trend continues. When a game or program is made with C++, it's usually nice because performance is mostly guaranteed. But if someone told me to write C++ myself, I'd cry. There's too much to memorize, and the standards are too varied. When I go to a project site for maintenance and it's a C++ project, I instantly lose energy — because it's just too difficult. I'd be happy if som…

For games, C++ becomes a much simpler language since game code bases usually ignore the C++ stdlib (at least mostly, and for good reasons, e.g. see [0]). And without the stdlib C++ is actually kinda-sorta okay-ish. Related, the main problem with the C++ ecosystem is that everybody carves out their own language subset, so it's not one ecosystem but many ecosystems with contradicting styles and language/stdlib subsets.…

If you don't use the STL you end up re-implementing it yourself. Usually poorly.

Re: C++: The Documentary

#33

Post by DesaiAshu »

raincole wrote: post #26
claiir wrote: post #5

> currently (as of Q3 2025) the fastest-growing of the top four languages in the world… +90% users in the past 3.5 years. Because of AI, right?

If this is a rhetorical question I genuinely don't know what's the implied answer. Why would AI specifically make C++ grow?

A few reasons: 1. Header files make C++ verbose. Header files are well within LLM's ability 2. LLMs can handle setting up cmake for you 3. C++ is very well documented relative to (most) newer languages 4. LLMs can port modern features like websockets and build API wrappers easily, reducing the disadvantage against web (since most documentation is for JS/python/go)

Coding languages have been developing for speed of (manual) writing - akin to how human languages did with modern alphabets. Now that writing is a lot easier, languages will likely evolve towards a focus on execution (or in the case of human languages, speed of reading and precision of understanding)

Re: C++: The Documentary

#34

Post by flohofwoe »

jdw64 wrote: post #14
bayindirh wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I don't find programming with C++ that hard. The downside is it needs a brain warm-up, and this is per project, but once that flywheel is spinning, I find it almost effortless to write code. I have to go through the same warm-up more or less for any language I work with, so it's not that different than writing Python, Go or Java for me.

There are so many standards and idioms that it gets confusing. There are still legacy codebases out there — some codebase still use C++98 as their standard, others use C++11... And with Unreal Engine, the modern C++ standard is C++14, right? There are things like smart pointers, but some places don't even use them. I feel like there are just too many features. When I saw template metaprogramming — that new feature —…

> When I saw template metaprogramming — that new feature — I realized I have no talent for C++.

It's not a new feature. And tbh, compared to Typescript, C++ templates are tame ;)

(but yeah, deciding when to stop digging into the template metaprogramming rabbit hole requires some common sense and sanity, too much template complexity is almost never worth the hassle)

Re: C++: The Documentary

#35

Post by aw1621107 »

keyle wrote: post #15

+90% users in the past 3.5 years huh? That is incredible growth. How is it even measured?

Herb's blog post links to the SlashData Developer Nation Survey, so presumably that's what the claim is based on. The company has a methodology page here [1], and it looks like the Developer Nation panel [2] is one of the sources used by that company.

[0]: https://www.slashdata.co/research/developer-population

[1]: https://www.slashdata.co/company/methodology

[2]: https://developernation.net/

Re: C++: The Documentary

#36

Post by Chaosvex »

flohofwoe wrote: post #30
Chaosvex wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That article probably isn't the best source to cite. You can look at the discussions on it elsewhere, although I'd just dismiss it as slop. The standard library is mostly fine to use unless you have specific needs. The bit about libraries is nonsense, sorry.

The article might be slop, but the problems described in it are definitely real ;)

Grossly exaggerated or misunderstood in many cases. Some of their arguments are just flat-out wrong.

I mean, why are they blaming the standard library for inherent properties of linked lists? Yeah, you don't want to use them without good reason. That's just called picking the right data structure for the job, not a flaw with the standard library.

Some of the other choices were tradeoffs between performance and usability. The standard maps have stable iterators, whereas third-party implementations almost never do because you can write faster implementations if you're willing to live without those guarantees. Was it the right choice in hindsight? Maybe, maybe not.

I'd personally like to see a namespaced versioned standard library but like that's ever going to happen

Re: C++: The Documentary

#38

Post by maccard »

jdw64 wrote: post #14
bayindirh wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I don't find programming with C++ that hard. The downside is it needs a brain warm-up, and this is per project, but once that flywheel is spinning, I find it almost effortless to write code. I have to go through the same warm-up more or less for any language I work with, so it's not that different than writing Python, Go or Java for me.

There are so many standards and idioms that it gets confusing. There are still legacy codebases out there — some codebase still use C++98 as their standard, others use C++11... And with Unreal Engine, the modern C++ standard is C++14, right? There are things like smart pointers, but some places don't even use them. I feel like there are just too many features. When I saw template metaprogramming — that new feature —…

This is true of any language. Python with flask vs django, with/without type hints. JavaScript with anhular and vue.

The varying standards are no different to major python versions or go versions - arguably there’s even less between most versions than there is in your average go release.

The differences in apps and frameworks don’t matter for day to day - std::string, Unreal’s FString and QT’s QString all are similar enough that 99.9% of the time.

Metaprogramming is one of those things; you either write it or you don’t. Knowing some basics is required but the vast majority of people use a handful of pre existing things without understanding the nuances of how it works under the hood.

Re: C++: The Documentary

#39

Post by samiv »

jdw64 wrote: post #11

It's surprising that C++'s development trend continues. When a game or program is made with C++, it's usually nice because performance is mostly guaranteed. But if someone told me to write C++ myself, I'd cry. There's too much to memorize, and the standards are too varied. When I go to a project site for maintenance and it's a C++ project, I instantly lose energy — because it's just too difficult. I'd be happy if som…

You're right that C++ has a lot of features. But like mentioned elsewhere most projects define their own conventions and the subset of features that they use.

Also the nice thing about having a large set of features is that C,++ allows you to write very nice abstractions (or not) at both very low or at very high level. In other words you can be very low level with online ASM and bit operations and bit and direct memory manipulation or very high level almost like a script language. Whatever the problem domain needs C++ has got you covered.

Re: C++: The Documentary

#40

Post by flohofwoe »

samiv wrote: post #31
flohofwoe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For games, C++ becomes a much simpler language since game code bases usually ignore the C++ stdlib (at least mostly, and for good reasons, e.g. see [0]). And without the stdlib C++ is actually kinda-sorta okay-ish. Related, the main problem with the C++ ecosystem is that everybody carves out their own language subset, so it's not one ecosystem but many ecosystems with contradicting styles and language/stdlib subsets.…

If you don't use the STL you end up re-implementing it yourself. Usually poorly.

> Usually poorly.

On the contrary. You can focus exactly on the features the higher level game code needs. The C++ stdlib is (for the most part) poorly designed, usually poorly implemented, the main reason for slow build times, and its complexity explodes because it needs to consider all edge cases that most code bases don't ever trigger.

A specialized dynamic array class in a few hundred lines (at most!) and with just the required features is much more useful than the 20kloc monster that's pulled in with `#include ` and which doesn't even do bounds checking in the 'idiomatic' usage.

Post reply on HN