Re: blowhard
Yes, but most of the time you don’t need C++ speed but you always need security.
I didn't mention speed or security, the point I responded to alluded to the idea that cross-platform code cannot be clear. I offered a counterpoint.
You need a certain level of skill at C++ to reliably not screw up security. Saying that C++ is a prereq to application coding, which is what you are implying, is unrealistic.
I didn't imply anything other than C++ is a lovely language when written clearly, and offers cross-platform results due to a rigorously specified library.
There’s only a certain level of complexity developers can handle, so specialization comes at the expense of wider skill sets. Mine are ANSI SQL, Python, dynamic code generation, automated regression testing, Ansible and dabbling in JS and HTML as well as more esoteric crap.
I'm unable to add anything, it's now my new favourite word salad.
Plus, a lot of what I do relies deeply on runtime introspection and dynamic object composition.
I'd love to understand what you mean, and how you think that somehow this is a technique locked away from us po' po' native language users.
C++, C and perhaps in the future Rust, are all perfectly suited to system level coding. I still want to learn Rust someday, but I don’t have the time to become a safe C++ coder.
Let's be honest, if you don't have time to write secure code, you code will be insecure, not a language issue, it's independent of language, C++ just requires you actually bother to learn the language, rather than pretend.
The reason I fancy Rust is that they seem to have aimed squarely at fully leaving memory allocs to the dev (no GC) coupled with tasking the compiler to reject memory mismanagement. It seems most of your pain is in dealing with the compiler, but then you can expect safety.
In the example I provided, no explicit allocations, no explicit thread management, so I respectfully submit, you are somewhat ill informed as to the capabilities being employed. E.g. RAII.
BTW, I am not actually calling you a god. Blowhard, perhaps ;-)
I think you need to revaluate C++ with a less jaundiced view, it offers safety, clarity and portability.
The STL, Boost and really some of our community's finest engineering work, this sort of bun-fight is just unseemly.