C++ Is A Dying Language?

[wossname]

C++ "The discerning programmer's 200lb hydraulic tungsten toothpick"

[aewarnick]

The great thing about C++ and many other low level languages is that, although out of the box, it's slow to code, but you can and should build up a code base of reusable code that makes coding lots faster.

Rapid Application Development tools such as Visual C++ are nice but they're not necessary. I don't use a GUI when building my programs. I've developed a system where my controls are automatically laid out easily according to another controls position.

Besides, you should be spending most of your time on the MEAT of your code, not the visual appearance. A good program is not good because it looks good; it's good because it runs well.

[wossname]

I agree. I think IDE's encourage code bloat and poor quality. The only time I use an IDE now is when I'm coding C# in Windows, it would be a nightmare without it. At all other times I use text editors (vim or notepad) or occasionally UltraEdit (under duress).

[singularis]

If you have the flexibility of C++ you can slowly build up anything (out of toothpicks)

[aewarnick]

C++ can become anything you want it to be. It can become a high level language that is almost as easy and fast to use as C# .net is and it can be used to program small devices such as computer chips.

[pSY cO.]

I've been using C++ for about 4 years now, which has given me enough time to become proficient with the language. I've also been using VB, Ruby, Python, Java, and C#. Overall, I think C++ was the best language to complete a large task. However, if you only need a small GUI application, why would you waste your time coding it all out in C++, when you can just drag/drop in VB or C#?

C++ will probably never die.

[wossname]

I can't help thinking the ultimate compromise is C. It does lack the higher level power of C++ but it does have compactness on its side. It doesn't have ASM's absolute speed, but it does have standardised portability.

If my life depended on it I'd code in C. Because its solid as a rock.

[CornedBee]

Compactness in what sense?

[wossname]

It compiles to a small executable on most platforms. Given that its used judiciously.

[pSY cO.]

Yeah, it does compile to small files, at least for me, on Windows XP, Vista, as well as Ubuntu/Gentoo Linux, and Minix 3. Never tried on a Mac.

[lunchboxtheman]

Nah, C++'s main problem is a lack of easily available libraries.

you'll find that there are libraries to do most things in C++ readily available.

Teehee. nuff said.

[CornedBee]

Readily available is not the same as easily available. Anyone who knows a bit will find libraries for just about anything in C++. They'll still have to install them, though.

[lunchboxtheman]

"easily 1 : in an easy manner : without difficulty"
"readily b : without much difficulty"

Taken from my old pal Webster.

Besides, availability has nothing to do with using a package/library, just how easy it is to attain/find.

That being said I don't think C++ is a dying language. It is still the main language used in just about any decently sized program available. You just can't pick it up in a week like BASIC.

[singularis]

Ok, Who thinks C is a dying language

[Doomguy0505]

People who are dependant on BASIC languages?

[sunburnt]

I would say that this is pretty much a dying thread. Let's lock it and let it die