How to explain an analog state variable filter ..

[Tony Hardie-Bick]

Yeah java is better than c++ and that's why I prototype in java. But c++ was a big, beautiful, bold step for a language tied to the silicon, and it could barely have been better for its time.

Tony (HB)

Peter Korsten <peter at severity-one.com> wrote:

>Op 13-10-2011 21:50, ibisum schreef:
>
>>> This is something I will never be able to do. C++ sucks at so many
>>> levels that it's incredible.
>>
>> Oh, come now.  You can see there are parts of C++ that do not suck,
>and
>> parts that really do.  (Oh yeah.)  But, the parts that do not suck
>are
>> quite brilliant and useful.  Even the most mundane C++ projects can
>be
>> quite elegantly navigable.
>>
>> C++ just demonstrates that you can't do any cool things by committee.
>
>The problem of C++ is that it adds OO to C, without making a bold 
>decision to tackle some of C's problems at the same  time. This is 
>something that Java and C# have done.
>
>Today, I wrote a catty comment on thedailywtf.com, to some moron who
>was 
>repeating the age-old 'Java is slow' mantra, and that nothing is as 
>efficient as C. I pointed out that the people who pay our salaries know
>
>that it takes far less time in development and debugging to write 
>something in Java than it does in C, and that the average developer was
>
>a whole lot more expensive than some more CPU power, extra memory and 
>air conditioning. But if that weren't the case for him as a developer, 
>that would make sense because of the amount of drivel coming from him.
>
>C++ is a product of its time, and for that time, it's quite good. But
>if 
>we look at what makes C development, at least for larger projects, 
>difficult:
>* no protection against memory leaks
>* no protection against buffer overruns
>* no exception handling
>* no type safety
>
>Of these, C++ only tackles type safety, and its exception handling is a
>
>joke. I mean, you can write 'throw 5;'. Java's and C#'s exception 
>handling are miles ahead of that.
>
>So whilst I understand the desire to maintain source-level
>compatibility 
>with C, it hasn't actually done the language much good, because Java
>and 
>C#, that are not source-compatible with C, have had much more success 
>than C++ ever had. The highly confusing syntax doesn't help much,
>either.
>
>Anyway, this sums it up nicely. :)
>http://www.softpanorama.org/Lang/Cpp_rama/humor.shtml
>
>
>- Peter
>_______________________________________________
>music-bar mailing list
>music-bar at lists.music-bar.org
>http://lists.music-bar.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/music-bar