Google executive frustrated by Java, C++ complexity

This is a discussion on Google executive frustrated by Java, C++ complexity within the General Discussions forums, part of the Community Boards category; The standard reserves the leading underscore and uppercase letter combination for internal names precisely so that obfuscation is not a ...

  1. #31
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    The standard reserves the leading underscore and uppercase letter combination for internal names precisely so that obfuscation is not a necessity.
    I'm pretty sure that the use of these reserved name is exactly the obfuscation Mad_Guy was complaining about.

    Regarding modules, there was a modules proposal for C++0x, which had some very solid ideas, but was rejected because it was too vague and incomplete yet. But modules are coming to C++, one way or another.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  2. #32
    Master Apprentice phantomotap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,217
    O_o

    "_M*" is obfuscation?

    Well, I'll be *@%!#&.

    Soma

  3. #33
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,436
    Of course it's not. It's only on the mind of those wanting desperately to say something bad about C++.

    Quote Originally Posted by CornedBee
    Regarding modules, there was a modules proposal for C++0x, which had some very solid ideas, but was rejected because it was too vague and incomplete yet. But modules are coming to C++, one way or another.
    The only person I heard publicly speaking of this was Herb Sutter. However he supported this idea in order to speed compilation of large programs and simplify their dependencies. That, I feel, places modules in the back of the pile. It's not because it will be made a technical report that it will ever see the light of the day. And I'm still not convinced the work on standardization of dynamic libraries can't replace modules.

    "Modules are coming one way or another", seems to me wishful thinking.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  4. #34
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,596
    Well if someone wants to hate a hammer then I guess that is their choice. I'd rather use it for what it was intended for instead of sitting around complaining that I can't drive in nails the way I want just yet.

  5. #35
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,538
    I believe that all they're saying is that a hammer might not work well for all situations (crowded spaces, for example), so they want to invent a new hammer that does work well for all situations (like crowded spaces).
    The new hammer might not be proven, so they're marketing it.
    Of course the old hammer works, and if you've got the technique down, crowded spaces probably aren't a problem.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  6. #36
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,596
    I believe that all they're saying is that a hammer might not work well for all situations (crowded spaces, for example), so they want to invent a new hammer that does work well for all situations (like crowded spaces).
    Hehe. Nice analogy. What I'm saying is that if you are in a tight space then maybe you shouldn't use the hammer. Complaining about the hammer not working in tight spaces is not going to help anyone. Unless of course someone then invents a hammer that does work in tight spaces...and then tries to show how the new hammer works better for everything.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Java vs C to make an OS
    By WOP in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 05-27-2007, 03:56 AM
  2. C#, Java, C++
    By incognito in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-05-2004, 02:06 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21