Re: [OT] Re: C++ *for Git*
- From
- Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
- Date
- Sep 23, 2007, 09:29 UTC
- Message-ID
- <e5bfff550709230229t79004ce2j5ce8c2ae7744a7f2@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <851wcpsv4z.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
On 9/23/07, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> David Brown <git@davidb.org> writes: > > > On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 04:09:51AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > >>On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 12:50:00AM +0200, Alex Unleashed wrote: > >>> I'd say being forced to be explicit is a good thing here, so that the > >>> programmer at least has some sort of good understanding of what is > >>> going on, and chances are that if he doesn't really know, things just > >>> won't work out (quite unlike a lot of other languages where this > >>> programmer might actually end up with something half-assed that > >>> "mostly" works). > >>> For some reason it seems to me a lot harder to find bad programmers > >>> surviving using C than a lot of the other languages. > >>
Well, according to your reasoning assembly should be the gotha of elite programmers, only very disciplined and meticulous programmers survive, much more then in C.
Is this a good way to measure a language?
> > C++ is good for creating black boxes.
Object oriented languages creates black boxes: that's the reason why object oriented exsists and also the reason why Linus hates it ;-)
Difference between C++ and other OO languages is mostly in the size of the applications written in that language IMHO.
C++ noramlly has the bigger code bases, so problem you mention are enanched and perhaps seem to depend on the language itself not on the size of application. IOW a Python (Ruby) app probably does not have the size of Firefox or Open Office, this _could_ induce the naive idea that the python app is cleaner or easier to understand just becasue of Python vc C++.
I really don't think so. I think this could be true for toy problems, but for real, for big applications is the design of the appllcation, not the language, that at 90% state the difference between clean and crap.
>A black box that has been > fitted into its environment and that has good innards is fine. A > black box with rotten innards, or not really being well-suited for the > job at hand, isn't.
I really agree here. The biggset downside of OO is that for it to work you should have a much deeper knowledge of the problem you want to handle. OO force you to analyze more and know more because a bad design normally means throwing everything in the trash can and start again.
Procedural programming as C is more immune to this 'good problem analysis' dependency.
Marco