The Link:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.vers ... ocus=57918

An article too:
http://advice.cio.com/esther_schindler/ ... hy_c_sucks

Well, everybody's got an opinion. It's just like having an ass, like the inspector Callahan prefers to call it. This ass is still rather too fat to be ignored. I will post more thoughts on my place. Here I just wanted to let you know of this,

plus

to tell the short version: I can't say I disagree with LT about the source of the trouble. Here you will find at least one my ramble on the very same thing. But further LT's *interpretation* of these facts is certainly colored by sort of problems on his behalf. It seemingly enters the pathological zone.

lol, ok, I read Linus's post and I think he's being a bit silly. A programming language doesn't make bad code. Like personally, I don't like VB, but VB as a language isn't THAT bad (especially not in .Net). It's just a personal preference.

And to say that using object oriented programming is bad is missing the point entirely.

On the other hand, if you're talking about code that executes fast, I can see the point of using a non-abstracted language. the closer you get to the hardware, the faster the code (usually), so, fine, if you want something uber-fast, go with c. If you want it to be really fast, write it in freakin' assembler. But maintaining assembler isn't exactly easy. Maintaining C isn't easy. Maintaining a well-built C++ (or any object oriented language) is always easier, assuming the skillsets of the developers involved are comparable. Hell, I use OO on practically everything I write now (even javascript, though I don't use OO exclusively) just because it makes maintenance so much easier.

Anyway....yea... I think Linus needs to chill. His hatred of c++ and object oriented languages is unfounded. Every language has its place, and a good developer can make programs in any language good.

I (and papa Stroustrup, btw) wouldn't agree that programs written on C++ work slower. In the reality there are problems that work up to 10% faster with C++ specific design and the problems that work up to 10% faster with C specific design.

Now watch out: the difference between C and C++ is that C++ supports virtually every single line of code written in C* while vice versa doesn't work. This implies that you can work with C++ all the time and use either C or C++ specific design to get out the maximum. That's what I do, and that is not only one advantage of C++.

The only parameter on which C++ is supposed to be always slower or equal to C is compile time. But that's not what end-user sees.

___________
* - There are few details that won't work, for they were very evil and actually useful only for obfuscated code writing.

Interesting. Eventually I really plan on learning C and C++.. if they're that closely related then so much the better. For now I'll stick with my c# where I can churn out a simple winform in 30 minutes.

GUI is a topic for itself apart from whole C and C++. Even more, it is OS dependent, unless you use cross platform libraries (which deal with the OSes for you). And UTF-8 support isn't built in like it is done in Java.

Those and many other C and C++ related issues should be fixed in . Still for me it is a question if and when it will appear.