C++ Creator Confident About Its Future

bonch writes "Bjarne Stroustrup is confident about the future of C++. He says there is a backlash against new languages like Java and C#, and that developers are returning to C++." From the article: "He claimed the main reason why people are not aware of this is because C++ doesn't have a 'propaganda campaign.' Sun Microsystems has touted the use of Java in the Mars Rover program, for example, but Stroustrup asserts that C++ was also used.

Comments

C++ has a long future...

[DavidNWelton]

...like any language that has had its time in the limelight. There are millions upon millions of lines of code written in it, and a lot of that isn't just going to be rewritten from one day to the next, no matter how much buzz and hype Sun and MS spew forth about their new languages.

I wrote an article about the economics of programming languages that talks about this and other issues that concern the adoption and lifecycle of languages, although be forewarned that the login system is a bit fiddly:

http://www.byte.com/documents/s=9553/byt1113845246 791/0418_welton.html

To those who have not programmed in C++ enough...

[pauljlucas]

... especially Java zealots, try reading Modern C++ Design by Alexandrescu. It'll blow your mind. Java generics don't even come close.

plagiarism

[cronian]

Isn't this copied from http://www.adequacy.org/public/stories/2002.7.4.18 3710.3582.html?

Re:To those who have not programmed in C++ enough.

[the eric conspiracy]

Here's a question for everyone: Which is better? An expertly designed and elegant C++ program with all the proper abstractions, frameworks, and methodologies that 1% of software developers can comprehend quickly, or a C program with a flat set of files, simple structs, and a few shell scripts to build it, which everyone understands (and can even debug)?

The simple flat file C program that everyone can debug is also a small program. OO really comes into it's own when you get over 20,000 lines of code. Then the kiss C style starts breaking down.

Not an extension

[rjh]

C++ started out as an extension of C, but the two quickly diverged. C++ is not a superset of C; it's an entirely different language nowadays with a syntax clearly borrowed from C.

A trivial conversion exists between any ISO C90 program and ISO C++, but then again, we have FORTRAN-to-C translators and nobody thinks C is an extension of FORTRAN.

Stroustrup would also likely be a little uncomfortable with the appellation "creator". While he's certainly been one of the pivotal figures in C++, Stroustrup has always been quick to recognize the contributions of other people and the work of the ISO standardization committee.

Re:While it would be nice...

[mobydobius]

if you really are interested in c++ regex, you should get to know Boost. It is a fantastic set of libraries that play nice with the standard c++ library, and includes regexes, parser generators, threads, algebra and probability packages, serialization, custom memory handling, and more.

Re:Nice troll.

[rjh]

The STL has a consistent design, but the base C++ language doesn't.

The STL is part of the base C++ language. Read the Standard.

The STL is a decent library

Damning with faint praise. Have you ever used the STL for more than a trivial 5,000-line app?

but it was hardly revolutionary. Type-safe generics were not a new technology at the time.

C++ generics predate Ada95's strong generics mechanism by quite some time. In fact, the inventor of generics--Stepanov--used C++ as his testbed for ideas. C++ generics go back to the early 1980s.

zerg

[Lord Omlette]

C++ Guru Scott Meyers just asked people, "Why do you program in C++?" If that's not relevant to this discussion, I don't know what is... (via Lambda the Ultimate)

Re:Sometimes C++ programmers miss the point

[ufnoise]

When programmers are a major cost (believe me, at Wall St. firms, they are a huge cost compared with the cost of machines), you should optimize the amount of time they spend waiting for compiles. We have a C++ library that is around 250,000 lines of code, that compiles in around 2 hours (and this is after a lot of work to try to make the compilation as fast as possible). We also have a 1,200,000 line java library that compiles in around 3 minutes. Any way you play it, programmers still spend a lot of time in the write code / compile / test cycle. In fact, this is where they spend most of their time.

Perhaps you need to take a look at your build system.

If an incremental change to you program is triggering a massive recompilation of everything there may also be a problem in how include's are being handled or your make files. There are several well known techniques to reduce this.