Thread: Moving from C to C++

Originally Posted by Laserve

when you work with other programmers you often have no choice. One is cooler than the other by knowing more C++ features so he writes a ........load of partially specialized templates.....and then he leaves the company.....and then there's a bug in it. happy debugging, or on our platform where we dont have a source debugger....happy code reading

if you are less knowledgeable than an other developer, you should aspire to his level, not drag him down to yours.

I work with mostly C programmers in an embedded environment. They're excellent in their field, but I can safely say I'm more knowlegdeable about C++. That's ok, 'cos they know way more than me about embedded development. I don't expect them to maintain my code if I leave, anymore than I could maintain theirs. Does that mean I limit my use of C++ to a minimum? Of course not. I use the language features I deem appropriate (including partially specialised templates). If I leave, the company should find another senior C++ engineer to replace me, not expect other developers to absorb the load.

Originally Posted by Laserve

becoming a senior in C++ engineer takes way longer than other environments. They are harder to find and therefore cost more money and all that for a language that tries most to compete in the field of application programming. It would cost a company way less if they use a more modern application programming language.
Let's suppose a not so senior engineer is the only option and he has to fix code from a previous senior who liked to use all C++ features cos thats the cool thing to do. (dont even try to deny it ^^) debugging that code takes longer and therefore costs more money. When a language is a bit more restrictive in redundant features, people dont get the chance to abuse them.

That is orthogonal to your point. I have already stated several times that I don't think C++ is the best language ever, I don't think ANY language is the best for all situations.

I don't believe that C++'s features are "redundant". Of course, they can be abused, but you can abuse basic if you want to.

A senior engineer should be replaced by a senior engineer. That's true in ANY language. Besides, one of the principles of OO is seperation of interface from implementation. I may very well write a complicated partial specialised template, but if it is contained behind a well-documented interface, even a junior engineer should be able to use it. I use boost.python a lot. I've looked at the code and I confess it's written by C++ developers a quantum level beyond my ability (for now ). I couldn't have written it, but I can certainly use it.

And yes I do deny that I use C++ features because it's "cool". C++ has never been cool. If I wanted to be cool, I'd use Java or C# (not necessarily bad languages, but certainly have a lot more "cool" factor).