FUD
IMHO, this post if just FUD. Let's say regarding "better performance", "memory usage", ... it's comparing C++ with C. Off course, one won't expect to gain much if anything adopting one over the other. C++ is a language to that aims to allow *NO OVERHEAD* over C, but not *LESS OVERHEAD*. So... showing off that to diminish C++ has no point.
Let's say regarding "better performance", "memory usage", ... it's comparing C++/C over C#/Java/AnyCurrent-GC-VM-PL and that it's a bad choice in that regard. As of now, I don't see anyone in its right mind chosing the last when it's really necessary to have memory control and performance at hand. I mean, for cases when that's really necessary.
Just a few days ago didn't a microsoft employ talk about a new c# based language that gains in performance over plain c# because of tactics of precise memory management etc, generally found in C++, Rust, C etc, but generally missed in C#, Java, etc?
Also, currently C++ allows one do adopt many kinds of programming interfaces, one can abuse templates (some think of using that to gain runtime performance and slow compilation times... which I find suspicios), one can have functional style interfaces, expecting lambda arguments and the like, one can have C interfaces, whatever. So, talking a language is bad solely because a given library in that language doesn't particularly fulfill your expectations doesn't have any merit.
I'm not saying C++ is good or bad, I'm just saying I only see FUD in that post, and I'm generally convinced by better argumentation.
IMHO, this post if just FUD. Let's say regarding "better performance", "memory usage", ... it's comparing C++ with C. Off course, one won't expect to gain much if anything adopting one over the other. C++ is a language to that aims to allow *NO OVERHEAD* over C, but not *LESS OVERHEAD*. So... showing off that to diminish C++ has no point.
Let's say regarding "better performance", "memory usage", ... it's comparing C++/C over C#/Java/AnyCurrent-GC-VM-PL and that it's a bad choice in that regard. As of now, I don't see anyone in its right mind chosing the last when it's really necessary to have memory control and performance at hand. I mean, for cases when that's really necessary.
Just a few days ago didn't a microsoft employ talk about a new c# based language that gains in performance over plain c# because of tactics of precise memory management etc, generally found in C++, Rust, C etc, but generally missed in C#, Java, etc?
Also, currently C++ allows one do adopt many kinds of programming interfaces, one can abuse templates (some think of using that to gain runtime performance and slow compilation times... which I find suspicios), one can have functional style interfaces, expecting lambda arguments and the like, one can have C interfaces, whatever. So, talking a language is bad solely because a given library in that language doesn't particularly fulfill your expectations doesn't have any merit.
I'm not saying C++ is good or bad, I'm just saying I only see FUD in that post, and I'm generally convinced by better argumentation.
Comment