It is like those folks that rather write JSDoc comments than using a linter like Typescript, because reasons.
Given the C++ adoption on 1990's commercial software and major consumer operating systems (Apple, IBM, Microsoft, Be), I bet if the FSF with their coding guidelines had not advocated for C, the adoption would not taken off beyond those days.
"Using a language other than C is like using a non-standard feature: it will cause trouble for users. Even if GCC supports the other language, users may find it inconvenient to have to install the compiler for that other language in order to build your program. So please write in C."
> C23 + <compiler C extensions> is hardly simpler as people advocate.
Well, certainly simpler than C++, at any rate.
I mean, just knowing the assignment rules in C++ is worthy of an entire book on its own. Understandably, the single rule of "assignment is a bitwise copy of the source variable into the destination variable" is inflexible, but at least the person reading the local code can, just from the current scope, determine whether some assignment is a bug or not!
In many ways, C++ requires global context when reading any local scope: will the correct destructor get called? Can this variable be used as an argument to a function (a lack of a copy constructor results in the bitwise copy for on stack, with the destructor for that instance running twice - once in the stack and again when the scope ends)? Is this being passed by reference (i.e. it might be modified by the function we are calling) or by value (i.e. we don't need to worry about whether `bar` has been changed after a call to `foo(bar)`).
Many programmers don't like holding lots of global scope in their head when working in some local scope. In C, all those examples above are clear in the local scope.
All programmers who prefer C over C++ have already tried C++ in large and non-trivial projects before walking away. I doubt that the reverse is true.
C++ has many things, and that is why many programmers want to stick with C
if you don't like those things, then don't use them
Some people would rather have a pen knife than a Swiss army knife.
1 reply →
It is like those folks that rather write JSDoc comments than using a linter like Typescript, because reasons.
Given the C++ adoption on 1990's commercial software and major consumer operating systems (Apple, IBM, Microsoft, Be), I bet if the FSF with their coding guidelines had not advocated for C, the adoption would not taken off beyond those days.
"Using a language other than C is like using a non-standard feature: it will cause trouble for users. Even if GCC supports the other language, users may find it inconvenient to have to install the compiler for that other language in order to build your program. So please write in C."
The GNU Coding Standard in 1994, http://web.mit.edu/gnu/doc/html/standards_7.html#SEC12
> Yet another C person reinventing things which C++ already has.
And yet another C++ person salty that people prefer simpler things.
C23 + <compiler C extensions> is hardly simpler as people advocate.
I can't think of a language that isn't simpler compared to C++
2 replies →
> C23 + <compiler C extensions> is hardly simpler as people advocate.
Well, certainly simpler than C++, at any rate.
I mean, just knowing the assignment rules in C++ is worthy of an entire book on its own. Understandably, the single rule of "assignment is a bitwise copy of the source variable into the destination variable" is inflexible, but at least the person reading the local code can, just from the current scope, determine whether some assignment is a bug or not!
In many ways, C++ requires global context when reading any local scope: will the correct destructor get called? Can this variable be used as an argument to a function (a lack of a copy constructor results in the bitwise copy for on stack, with the destructor for that instance running twice - once in the stack and again when the scope ends)? Is this being passed by reference (i.e. it might be modified by the function we are calling) or by value (i.e. we don't need to worry about whether `bar` has been changed after a call to `foo(bar)`).
Many programmers don't like holding lots of global scope in their head when working in some local scope. In C, all those examples above are clear in the local scope.
All programmers who prefer C over C++ have already tried C++ in large and non-trivial projects before walking away. I doubt that the reverse is true.
7 replies →