ESR on post-C landscape

[codephantom]

On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 06:35:30 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
Grostad wrote:
> No, classes is a powerful modelling primitive. C++ got that 
> right. C++ is also fairly uniform because of it.

Yes, I agree that classes are a powerful modelling primitive, but 
my point was that Stroustrup made classes the 'primary focus of 
program design'. Yes, that made it more uniform alright... 
uniformly more complicated. And why? Because he went on to throw 
C into the mix, because performance in Simula was so poor, and 
would not scale. C promised the efficiency and scalability he was 
after. But an efficient and scalable 'class oriented' language, 
means complexity was inevitable.

It wasn't a bad decision on his part. It was right for the time I 
guess. But it set the stage for its demise I believe.

> People who harp about how OO is a failure don't know how to do 
> real world modelling...

I would never say OO itself is a failure. But the idea that is 
should be the 'primary focus of program design' .. I think that 
is a failure...and I think that principle is generally accepted 
these days.


>> I have to wonder whether that conclusion sparked the 
>> inevitable demise of C++.
>
> There is no demise...

If the next C++ doesn't get modules, that'll be the end of 
it...for sure.

>> Eric should be asking a similar question about Go ..what 
>> decision has been made that sparked Go's inevitable demise - 
>> or in the case of Go, decision would be decisions.
>
> Go is growing...

Yeah..but into what? It's all those furry gopher toys, t-shirts, 
and playful colors.. I think that's what's attracting people to 
Go. Google is the master of advertising afterall. Would work well 
in a kindergarten. But it makes me want to puke. It's so fake.

>> a := b
>
> A practical shorthand, if you dont like it, then dont use it.

Was just a senseless, unnecessary change. The immediate 
impression I got, was that they were trying to undo a decision, 
that was made when B was developed, rather doing it because it 
really assisted the modern programmer (what language uses that? 
None that I use that's for sure). And I get that feeling about 
other decisions they've made...as if they are just trying to 
correct the past. They should be focused on the future. They 
should have got some experienced younger programmers at google to 
design a language instead. I bet it wouldn't look anything like 
Go.