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

From: Markus Teich <>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:50:05 -0700

Jimmie Houchin wrote:
> I have been for the last several weeks (months) researching what language I
> want to use to implement a couple of apps I want to do.

What kind of apps are you planning to write?

> So I have this internal debate in me as to whether or not to learn C and/or
> C++. One one hand I tend towards C. But for someone who has spent the last 20
> years using learning Python and Smalltalk. C looks pretty primitive. C++ looks
> complicated. And C++ OOP does not look a thing like Smalltalk OOP.

See the „primitivity“ of C as a benefit. In the beginning you may have to think
a little harder to fit something into these „limitations“ but in the end it pays
off, since you don't have to struggle with much OOP complexity when maintaining
your code.

> The sticky wicket in their for me is that I must connect to either C++ or Java
> libraries. One of my apps has a C wrapper around the C++ library. So any
> language that can connect to C can use this library. But many of the required
> libraries I need to use are in C++.

Any C++ library that pretends to be sane also has C bindings.

> And neither natively provide the interactiveness of Python/Smalltalk. Which
> is something I require. So I would need then to add either Python or probably
> Lua into the equation.

You could also try Go (, which has syntax similar to
C/C++/Java, compiles to binaries, feels like python and allows for a very
interestingly restricted way of OOP.

> The reason I write, is that in my research for pros and cons of C verses C++.
> Almost all of the anti-C++ writings are pre 2011 and therefore pre C++11/C++14
> and the coming C++17.

Did you check if the authors of the anti-C++ postings changed their opinion in
2011? They probably did not and their critic is still valid.

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

Welcome to sl, Jimmie.

Received on Wed Sep 17 2014 - 07:50:05 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Sep 17 2014 - 07:48:06 CEST