C++ to catch up?

[Marco Leise]

Am Mon, 05 Nov 2012 13:10:35 +0100
schrieb "Paulo Pinto" <pjmlp at progtools.org>:

> On Monday, 5 November 2012 at 11:06:39 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
> > On Monday, 5 November 2012 at 10:22:02 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 11:00:27 +0100
> >> "jdrewsen" <nospam4321 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It seems like the C++ committee is speeding up development 
> >>> adding lots of the goodies from D like Ranges, static if, 
> >>> template contraints etc.
> >>> 
> >>> Will D still have a case when C++ gets this done?
> >>> 
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, even if they go and add all of D's features, D will still 
> >> be much
> >> cleaner. (IMO)
> >
> > C++'s "range" is actually a wrapper over an iterator 
> > "first-last" pair. While it does bring the convenience of D's 
> > ranges to C++, it remains hobbled in terms of efficiency and 
> > implementation. C++'s paradigm is pointers and iterators. At 
> > best, you can sparkle some ranges over it, but you'll never 
> > shift the paradigm.
> >
> > --------
> > The thing with C++'s new feature is that it requires developers 
> > to be on the bleeding edge of C++ knowledge. It's fine for the 
> > enthusiasts that read programming journals on their week-ends 
> > (like you and I), but not for the standard developer. Not to 
> > mention, even then, the syntax is hard as hell: lambdas in for 
> > loops? I have to look up the syntax every time. automatic type 
> > inference of the return value of a function? "auto foo() -> 
> > declype(...)", what...?
> >
> > All these functionalities are great, but also out of reach. 
> > Most of my colleagues still struggle with "simple" design 
> > patters such as strategies, or just plain algorithms with 
> > functors. Everytime I say something like "awesome, C++ will 
> > allow type inference" or "yay, RValue references!" they look at 
> > me like I'm some kind of weird space alien...
> >
> > --------
> > D packages the whole thing in an easy to use but complete 
> > package. C++ just stacks complicated stuff on top of a hard to 
> > use core.
> 
> I have the same feeling with some of our developers.
> 
> Simpler languages tend to be manager friendly. It is always 
> easier to find cheap resources.
> 
> In my currently employer I have only done Java and C# projects so 
> far, and I still fear the day I might do a C or C++ project, 
> given the type of knowledge shown by some of our coworkers.
> 
> 
> --
> Paulo

Are you talking bad about your colleagues behind their backs ?
Hey, if I was to write a project in Haskell I'd be the idiot,
too.

-- 
Marco