Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++ • Hacker News Board

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#151

Post by santoshalper » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:23 PM UTC

My experience as a career software engineer is so different from the author's that is genuinely amazes me that the spectrum of experiences is so broad as to encompass both of us. I have built software for over 25 years, in at least 30 languages/frameworks/toolchains. While I certainly believe some are stronger than others, and certainly more fit for specific purposes, I have never really given a shit about the languages or the tools and have always been able to make them work and build the product. Looking back, none of my joy, happiness, or satisfaction has come from the languages or tools themselves, but from the products I built using them and who was helped by those products.

Perhaps in 2022, Isabella should work on caring less about the means and more about the ends of engineering. There are so many important, valuable things engineers can do when we stop fetishizing the tools and start focusing on the outcomes.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#152

Post by chmod600 » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:25 PM UTC

It sounds like the author is spending too much time way up in the hights of abstraction and needs more concrete things to work on. For instance, writing more programs -- I bet there are a lot of programs where you don't even really need variadic generics (or was it generic variadics?).

Don't get me wrong: I appreciate that people spend all this effort to design and evolve languages. But you need to ground yourself in concrete practice for many reasons, including your own sanity.

Disclaimer: I don't know anything about the author aside from what's in the article.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#153

Post by mgaunard » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:30 PM UTC

quietbritishjim wrote: post #36

It's great to hear that the author got a diagnosis for their condition (I hope that "condition" is not too unsuitable a word). I'm not very familiar with such things, but I can imagine that could be an important first step to understand and mitigate it. But it seems to me that they're still some way off from understanding their condition. They characterise it as having "extremely high standards" or not being able to…

Most good programmers have OCPD.

I think the more serious problem with that person is the lack of awareness of their own narcissism.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#154

Post by secondcoming » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:32 PM UTC

chrsig wrote: post #77

ch_123 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine needing to announce your "departure" from a community. The exact same thing jumped out at me. Does anyone know if the author is a particularly well known or influential member of the C++ community?

I can't speak to their well-known-ness or influence, but they're definitely one of my favorite cppcon speakers[0] The community is lessened by their departure [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7THzO-D0ta4

Maybe Strousoup was showing disgust at the words written on the t-shirt?

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#155

Post by digitalsin » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:33 PM UTC

naxcl wrote: post #120

its_bbq wrote: post #64

I met Izzy a few times at cppcon and always came away impressed. I have basically the same thoughts about the c++ community -- it burns people out and it's filled with a ton of negativity and ego and it's very hard to get anything done. While I was at Google I spent some time trying to push for some sort of codes of conduct after a colleague of mine had a reasonable proposal ripped to shreds in email groups with all…

You do not need a code of conduct for complaining about a sexist remark inside a corporation. CoCs ruin projects, create a stifled atmosphere of hate and distrust and it is always the wrong people who obtain power. Persons who are vocally against CoCs can very well be on your side regarding sexist remarks. Personal attacks are difficult to quantify. Often they are a last resort for shutting up someone who thinks they…

Absolutely spot on.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#156

Post by mgaunard » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:34 PM UTC

rashkov wrote: post #51

Atomskun wrote: post #21

[flagged]

Imagine realizing you wasted a decade of your life in the false hope of making a difference, but couldn’t because of a dysfunctional community dynamic… I can’t because I haven’t done that, and perhaps you can’t either. It may read this way to you but that’s the nature of blogs. They’re public diaries. Narcissism is often part of the medium itself.

No post body was provided.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#157

Post by Brian_K_White » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:40 PM UTC

"hates implicit behavior" and "lacks arity overloading" both sound refreshingly sane to me.

default arguments? I have to agree that one is hard to justify. It's not merely convenient but also does no harm that I can see, even specifically in the context of rust's special mandates. Then again it's also not a huge problem either, and maybe a good thing for rust's special goal, that you always have to supply default values when calling rather than when declaring.

Not knowing this person beyond this bit of text, I come away thinking I too would probably not want to adopt many of their ideas and would be another one of the many people they are "disappointed" by for that.

I do not buy their parting shot "... and I have the C++ committee to thank for this."

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#158

Post by indymike » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:46 PM UTC

junon wrote: post #85

indymike wrote: post #8

Maybe worry less about languages. All through my career I've seen remarkable applications written in languages people heaped derision on, or were less than perfect in some way or the other.

> Maybe worry less about languages Why should someone who contributes to the development of the language specs themselves "worry less" about languages?

> Why should someone who contributes to the development of the language specs themselves "worry less" about languages?

Why not spend time solving different problems and then go back to languages? Why must one dedicate their life to a single field of expertise? The author was doing devops (with golang and kubernetes - the article is worth a read just for his take on kubernetes) work and said it was more rewarding than his work with C++.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#159

Post by Jasper_ » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:48 PM UTC

naxcl wrote: post #120

its_bbq wrote: post #64

I met Izzy a few times at cppcon and always came away impressed. I have basically the same thoughts about the c++ community -- it burns people out and it's filled with a ton of negativity and ego and it's very hard to get anything done. While I was at Google I spent some time trying to push for some sort of codes of conduct after a colleague of mine had a reasonable proposal ripped to shreds in email groups with all…

You do not need a code of conduct for complaining about a sexist remark inside a corporation. CoCs ruin projects, create a stifled atmosphere of hate and distrust and it is always the wrong people who obtain power. Persons who are vocally against CoCs can very well be on your side regarding sexist remarks. Personal attacks are difficult to quantify. Often they are a last resort for shutting up someone who thinks they…

I've seen reports of sexism get ignored and go unhandled (usually because "they're such a good contributor, we can't afford to lose them"), leading to a slow death as people stop contributing. The goal here is to make it so that there's an established set of standards, and a procedure to follow in case they get violated.

If implemented correctly, policies for this should not make matters worse, it should just let these projects be able to draw clearer lines towards acceptable behavior and build trust that these issues can and will be handled.

Re: Wrapping Up 2021. Leaving C++

#160

Post by Jasper_ » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

junon wrote: post #103

phaedrus wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author of the article also sounds like the sort of individual or clique who derail Stack Overflow posts because they feel the premise of the question is wrong (leaving both the original asker and any later reader with their actual problem still unsolved).

Imagine for a moment what SO's signal:noise ratio would look like if people didn't set some sort of bar for quality?

Probably better, honestly, as people would be encouraged to give answers rather than close questions for being duplicates of things they aren't.