@programminginc - страница 1048

Compared to some programming languages the std and stl of C++ seems to have a feature bloat and there are ridiculous many ways to mess up RAII or other stuff with that. But compared to langauges like Go and Java the stl isn't that bad.

psy4

what do you mean by bloated?

For example when you extend an object the object knows of its chain of inheritance at compile time, but this is not immediately evident from reading an extended instance in the code. This allows code that is simple to write and expand, but more challenging to maintain. It also results in a large amount of boilerplate programming by convention. HENCE BLOATED😢

Stanislav

For example when you extend an object the object knows of its chain of inheritance at compile time, but this is not immediately evident from reading an extended instance in the code. This allows code that is simple to write and expand, but more challenging to maintain. It also results in a large amount of boilerplate programming by convention. HENCE BLOATED😢

BinaryByter

C++ is inherently OOP and OOP is not concise or transparent. Hence, BLOATED 😁

thats wrong

BinaryByter

cpp can be used like c

BinaryByter

and it can to some extent be used like haskell

BinaryByter

For example when you extend an object the object knows of its chain of inheritance at compile time, but this is not immediately evident from reading an extended instance in the code. This allows code that is simple to write and expand, but more challenging to maintain. It also results in a large amount of boilerplate programming by convention. HENCE BLOATED😢

"when you extend an object" wut?

psy4

I was just ranting about OOP mess

BinaryByter

you dont have to use cpp as purely oop

BinaryByter

yes, inheritance is messy

BinaryByter

thats why i seldomly use it

BinaryByter

unless i have to

Anonymous

and it can to some extent be used like haskell

Mhm, its a bit tricky to say that. You can use a functional style in cpp, but cpp doesn't have the benefits of haskell. Thats the sad part

psy4

you dont have to use cpp as purely oop

The popular advice to use C++ not as it's meant to doesn't hold, for me it always turns into a constant loosing struggle to keep the code clean of fancy abstractions.

BinaryByter

Mhm, its a bit tricky to say that. You can use a functional style in cpp, but cpp doesn't have the benefits of haskell. Thats the sad part

i said "to some extent"

BinaryByter

C++ isnt meant to be oop only

BinaryByter

Its multiparadygmal

Anonymous

i said "to some extent"

Yeah, and if, only the style.

psy4

you're not getting the point, are you

BinaryByter

Yeah, and if, only the style.

lets put it like that: c++ has closures

BinaryByter

you're not getting the point, are you

you arent

Anonymous

lets put it like that: c++ has closures

Thats more correct, yes

psy4

my main point is fixing performance problems suddenly means replacing STL features, which is a lot more work than simply writing what you need. Assuming you can figure out which knob needs turning in the first place, that is.

BinaryByter

the stl is performant

BinaryByter

its as performant as it gets

psy4

the stl is performant

Too performant indeed 😍. Therefore, I've come to the point where I consider C++ to be a bad compromise, period. For low level fundamentals, C works better; and for higher level code there are plenty of more convenient options. Maybe, 🦀 Rust ? 😁

BinaryByter

wat?

psy4

Good Night, my fellow C/++ advocates 😘😁

Anonymous

Well, if the stl isn't fast enough for your needs, use C or asm. Pretty easy. Why is C++ a bad language then?

BinaryByter

Well, if the stl isn't fast enough for your needs, use C or asm. Pretty easy. Why is C++ a bad language then?

using c or asm wont speed up things

psy4

wat?

we shall have a long chat some time