8 ms·

>simplicity I didn't spent a lot of hours in C++ world, but it never felt simple - N compilers, N package managers, N ways to do everything

1ris 5y ago
N ways to do something, but in exchange you can get good solutions in C++. In the C# world you are locked to a medicore compiler, with a medicore package manager, a sub standard (and complicated!) build system and a unacceptable code formatter, for example.
- tester34 5y ago
  >with a medicore package manager What do you mean? since .NET Core it always worked flawlessly for me >unacceptable code formatter hmm? that's preference not an argument.
  - 1ris 5y ago
    With package manager I mean nuget. The last time I used .net (one year ago) ".Net core" was a target platform and already renamed to ".Net". No, that's not a preference. I'm not complaining about a lack of options, I really don't care how code looks, if it all looks the same. And it fails at that. It quite often simply takes the code as it is and indents it a little bit. Clang-format (and rustfmt and dart format and plenty of others) give you the nice, tidy and homogeneous code layout i expect from a auto formatter.
    - tester34 5y ago
      Yea, I meant Nuget iirc there were some changes around .NET Framework -> .NET Core to how does it work (where packages are stored) and that's why I said that since .NET Core I didn't have problems with it
adev_ 5y ago
> I didn't spent a lot of hours in C++ world, but it never felt simple C++ is not simple. But presenting C# (or Java) as "simple" is equally hypocritical. The JVM or the CLR and their associated frameworks are monster of complexity, engineering and legacy that require close to an entire lifetime to be mastered entirely. C# (or Java) are "accessible", meaning a newbie devlopper can produce something halfway baked in these languages relatively quickly. And this is something you can not say about C++. But they are not in any way "simple".
- kaba0 5y ago
  How exactly are they not simple? Well, not C# because it has a problem with a bit of a feature creep similar to C++, but Java is a really tiny language compared to.. anything. And you don’t have to be a master of the JVM because chances are you are not a gcc/clang maintainer and yet you can write performant-enough correct code.
- tester34 5y ago
  I don't think you're talking about same thing Just because JVM or CLR are complex, then it *doesn't* mean that writting good C# / Java requires you to be proficient at CLR/JVM lvl and because of that it is hard. >meaning a newbie devlopper can produce something halfway baked in these languages relatively quickly. Newbie developer can produce mediocre solutions in all of those - C#, Java, C++. The difference is that in C#/Java world it may be slow and in C++/C world it may be exploitable (more likely) <snark>. Anyway, in my world very often it's not about internals, but about modeling skills, about OOP, testability. Those are some of the ways of measuring how good the code is. Good system modeling skills are way above technology

1ris 5y ago

N ways to do something, but in exchange you can get good solutions in C++. In the C# world you are locked to a medicore compiler, with a medicore package manager, a sub standard (and complicated!) build system and a unacceptable code formatter, for example.

tester34 5y ago
>with a medicore package manager What do you mean? since .NET Core it always worked flawlessly for me >unacceptable code formatter hmm? that's preference not an argument.
- 1ris 5y ago
  With package manager I mean nuget. The last time I used .net (one year ago) ".Net core" was a target platform and already renamed to ".Net". No, that's not a preference. I'm not complaining about a lack of options, I really don't care how code looks, if it all looks the same. And it fails at that. It quite often simply takes the code as it is and indents it a little bit. Clang-format (and rustfmt and dart format and plenty of others) give you the nice, tidy and homogeneous code layout i expect from a auto formatter.
  - tester34 5y ago
    Yea, I meant Nuget iirc there were some changes around .NET Framework -> .NET Core to how does it work (where packages are stored) and that's why I said that since .NET Core I didn't have problems with it

adev_ 5y ago

> I didn't spent a lot of hours in C++ world, but it never felt simple C++ is not simple. But presenting C# (or Java) as "simple" is equally hypocritical. The JVM or the CLR and their associated frameworks are monster of complexity, engineering and legacy that require close to an entire lifetime to be mastered entirely. C# (or Java) are "accessible", meaning a newbie devlopper can produce something halfway baked in these languages relatively quickly. And this is something you can not say about C++. But they are not in any way "simple".

kaba0 5y ago
How exactly are they not simple? Well, not C# because it has a problem with a bit of a feature creep similar to C++, but Java is a really tiny language compared to.. anything. And you don’t have to be a master of the JVM because chances are you are not a gcc/clang maintainer and yet you can write performant-enough correct code.
tester34 5y ago
I don't think you're talking about same thing Just because JVM or CLR are complex, then it *doesn't* mean that writting good C# / Java requires you to be proficient at CLR/JVM lvl and because of that it is hard. >meaning a newbie devlopper can produce something halfway baked in these languages relatively quickly. Newbie developer can produce mediocre solutions in all of those - C#, Java, C++. The difference is that in C#/Java world it may be slow and in C++/C world it may be exploitable (more likely) <snark>. Anyway, in my world very often it's not about internals, but about modeling skills, about OOP, testability. Those are some of the ways of measuring how good the code is. Good system modeling skills are way above technology