Re: [dev] Re: [RFC] Design of a vim like text editor

From: FRIGN <>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 00:45:27 +0200

On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 17:25:02 -0500
Jimmie Houchin <> wrote:

Hey Jimmie,

> Seeing how much C++ people complain about the C like stuff or the actual
> C stuff in C++. Why don't they just grow a pair and clean out all the
> stuff they complain about. Simplify the language and get on with it. As
> it is, is seems as if is just growing and nothing gets removed. Only new
> books saying don't use the old stuff. If you don't want it used then
> remove it. Ugh!

Because it's one of C++'s design goals to be backwards-compatible to C.
It's the only thing I'd attribute to the C language.
Given this design-goal, the result has been pretty remarkable.

But apart from that, I need a programming language to solve problems for
me efficiently.
And no other language has surpassed C for me (by far!).
Many of those apologetics trying to sweet-talk C++ are actually quite
obsessed with the fact they wasted years learning a language no human
can possibly learn to the fullest.

The strongest argument for me against C++ is not a technical one, but
the fact that you are forced to program in subsets.
This leads to the problem that new developers planning on contributing
to a project might have problems with adapting to it because it uses
a different subset of the C++-language than they are accustomed to.

I personally started with C++ a few years back when I began with system
The more I do with C and read about the problems C++-developers have,
I'm glad about having made the switch to C, even though it was harder
to learn in the beginning.

> My apologies for the mini-rant. And Hi! First time poster to suckless.
> Thanks for having a group which fights against the current direction in
> complexity in software.

You're welcome.



Received on Wed Sep 17 2014 - 00:45:27 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Sep 17 2014 - 00:48:07 CEST