I think he does a good job of humorously pointing out the difficulties involved with writing a C++ Webapp, but I don't doubt that he's serious about the performance characteristics being a good thing.
C++: A language for next generation web apps
11–20 of 99 posts
Re: C++: A language for next generation web apps
#12if you're on an embedded device, this is actually not a satire
on that note does anyone know of an ansi Forth (or fairly portable at least) server that's reasonably robust.
Re: C++: A language for next generation web apps
#13if you're on an embedded device, this is actually not a satire
Which is a very valid point, I have never understood why organizations that need massive scalability for simple, stateless, distributed apps would not pursue such a course.
Re: C++: A language for next generation web apps
#14It's perfectly sane to write web services (computationally heavy processes accessed via REST) in C++. But for the algorithm-light, marketing-heavy frontend to such a service, use something easier—the optimizations C++ offers aren't worth it there.
Re: C++: A language for next generation web apps
#15To be fair, after coming back to C++ after years in the world of Python and Haskell, it's not as bad as I remembered.
C++ is actually a moderately effective functional programming language. With reasonable knowledge of the standard data structures, and using BOOST, one can actually write fairly expressive and effective C++ code.
Most of the time, I feel like all I'm doing is writing a much more verbose version of Python. The rest of the time, I'm hunting nightmarish segfaults and segfault and template errors.
Re: C++: A language for next generation web apps
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had to read that a few times. What is he talking about?
1 wchar_t * 2 utf2wide(const char *utf) 3 { 4 size_t len; 5 wchar_t *wide; 6 len = mbstowcs(NULL, utf, 0); 7 wide = malloc(sizeof(*wide) * (len + 1)); 8 mbstowcs(wide, utf, len); 9 return wide; 10 }
That is definitely the most to-the-point response I've ever seen.
Re: C++: A language for next generation web apps
#17Reminded me of this:
http://code.google.com/p/madfish-webtoolkit/
Re: C++: A language for next generation web apps
#18"MySql is GPL'd, so you can't even link to its client library in a closed source app."
AFAIK it's GPLv2 (and not AGPL) so this is only true if you intend to distribute your application itself, not just host it yourself.
Re: C++: A language for next generation web apps
#19To be fair, after coming back to C++ after years in the world of Python and Haskell, it's not as bad as I remembered. C++ is actually a moderately effective functional programming language. With reasonable knowledge of the standard data structures, and using BOOST, one can actually write fairly expressive and effective C++ code. Most of the time, I feel like all I'm doing is writing a much more verbose version of Pyt…
Oddly enough I'm back to C++ too, after Ruby.
One nice thing is; in a fast language, tests run quickly too.
Also, Python and Ruby don't have the equivalent of an ASSERT (you could roll your own but it's not standard practice).
Also, C++ has standard hash lists and complicated data structure are actually going to run quickly.
And while memory management can be a pain, you are doing it yourself so you can track down memory leaks rather than having them be inherent in the interpreter...
...as in Ruby AND Mono.
Re: C++: A language for next generation web apps
#20To be fair, after coming back to C++ after years in the world of Python and Haskell, it's not as bad as I remembered. C++ is actually a moderately effective functional programming language. With reasonable knowledge of the standard data structures, and using BOOST, one can actually write fairly expressive and effective C++ code. Most of the time, I feel like all I'm doing is writing a much more verbose version of Pyt…
Oddly enough I'm back to C++ too, after Ruby. One nice thing is; in a fast language, tests run quickly too. Also, Python and Ruby don't have the equivalent of an ASSERT (you could roll your own but it's not standard practice ). Also, C++ has standard hash lists and complicated data structure are actually going to run quickly. And while memory management can be a pain, you are doing it yourself so you can track down m…
C++ doesn't actually have a standard "hash list" (I assume you meant hash map or hash set?). Depending on your implementation, you either have hash_{map,set}, unordered_{map,set}, both, or something entirely different. tr1 specified unordered_{map,set}, but tr1 is only technically a proposal, not a standard.
I think a safe assumption is that tr1::unordered_{map,set} will be available in all implementations by now, but until C++0x is ratified and implemented by major compilers, you will run into different platforms having (possibly) different implementations. And lets be honest - even after C++0x has been implemented in major compilers, you will still have subtly different/buggy implementations.
edit: I had conflated {hash,unordered}_{set,map}. Fixed