31–33 of 33 posts
I agree with Linus. C++ is too complex and overengineered, and taking in contributions in it for something like git, is a recipe for disaster. However, C in all its simplicity already has its potential for abuse. Macros can go very bad. Very bad. (Just look at openSSL). It is also not difficult to abuse the left-right rule in pointer arithmetic: *x->a->c=5. It can easily become incomprehensible. We did not need C++.…
I agree with Linus. C++ is too complex and overengineered, and taking in contributions in it for something like git, is a recipe for disaster. However, C in all its simplicity already has its potential for abuse. Macros can go very bad. Very bad. (Just look at openSSL). It is also not difficult to abuse the left-right rule in pointer arithmetic: *x->a->c=5. It can easily become incomprehensible. We did not need C++.…
Something like MISRA C ?
C++ started out as a great 'next generation C', but in the last years it became a playfield for CS-academics, just adding one useless esotheric feature after each other.
> inefficient abstracted programming models where two years down the road > you notice that some abstraction wasn't very efficient, but now all > your code depends on all the nice object models around it, and you > cannot fix it without rewriting your app. The opposite can also be said. By re-inventing a simple data structure, you can end up 2 years later in the same position where your structure is inefficient (list…
> While implicit operator overload was probably a C++ mistake are you talking about the implicit conversion operator or operator overloading in C++? For the former, it has been vastly improved in C++11 with the addition of explicit conversion operator. For the later, some very important capabilities of C++ rely on operator overloading namely the assignment operator (copy/move assignment) and the function operator (al…