And I think that's a major reason why C++ usage is gradually becoming a niche thing used only where absolutely necessary. As evidence for that claim I submit this chart (you need to scroll down a page): https://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/c++.do
C++ used to be required for over 30% of all permanent programming jobs in the UK back in 2005. Now it's down to 8.5% and falling. That's in stark contrast with all the enthusiasm created by the features added since C++11, features that I very much welcome.
Programming is more accessible than ever before, more jobs require some element of programming than ever before, and more things are getting created using code. This means that people who have never written code before are writing code as a job of work, and are writing it in simpler-to-learn languages.
Newer, simpler programming jobs are acquiring programmers in other languages, not necessarily that C++'s complexity is driving people away from it into the arms of other languages or that C++ is not acquiring newer programmers at the same rates (on existing base) as before.
It would be interesting to know if the share of developers with formal training has risen or fallen in the past 12 years. I would have guessed it has risen in spite of a large number of JavaScript wielding web designers.
There used to be quite a lot of DIY programming using VB6, VBA, Excel, MS-Access, dBASE, FoxPro, etc, at a time when professional IT departments and cloud services were not as widespread as they are today. In my opinion these technologies were a lot more accessible than the current web platform.
As much as I complain about C++, I just don't think there's a viable alternative, and I somewhat reject the notion that writing performant code is a niche thing. Like, sure, there are common contexts where you can get away with wasting CPU, but IMO part of being a skilled professional programmer is getting the most out of the machine, and you just can't do that with most other languages.
It surely isn't, otherwise we wouldn't be getting wind back into going native sails, with Swift, Rust, Go, Crystal, D, .NET Native, CoreRT, Java 9 (just a little bit, more with 10)....
Fyi, when safety is important and C++ is the only viable alternative, there's SaferCPlusPlus[1].
And wrt new C++17 features, I'll just point out that the SaferCPlusPlus library provides a version of std::any (and std::variant) geared specifically for pointer/iterators. That is, you can, for example, dereference the contained pointer/iterator without needing to know its actual type. And for those that need it, it also provides the "recursive_shared_timed_mutex" that's notably missing from the standard library.
[1] shameless plug: https://github.com/duneroadrunner/SaferCPlusPlus
If C++ is your only hammer then every problem looks like a nail to you. Of course, there are viable alternatives. At least Ada which is still used in avionics and other safety critical systems.
Like Ariane 5? :->
The crash was caused in part by failing to catch an exception in Ada.
http://sunnyday.mit.edu/accidents/Ariane5accidentreport.html
http://compgroups.net/comp.lang.ada/ariane5-faq/1406823
And yes, Ada is still used today.
Ada is an interesting language (we were taught it as our first language at uni), but it's not free from safety issues.
The flaws C++ were the reasons why Rust was invented. Mozilla wanted a safe language for the next generation of browsers, and they realized that C++ is not a good choice for safe programming.
Quote: "Mozilla intends to use Rust as a platform for prototyping experimental browser architectures. Specifically, the hope is to develop a browser that is more amenable to parallelization than existing ones, while also being less prone to common C++ coding errors."
Source: https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Mozilla-developing-the-Rust-lan...
That's true if you work alone. If you work in a team, it's almost guaranteed that someone will love using advanced features just for the sake of using advanced features, creating insanely verbose and abstracted behemoths which are bad both for the human developers and the machines to read.
I suppose it's good for job security...
Having poorly thought out complexity and no complexity often result in similar ends.
Honestly, I've seen C++ code so muddled and obfuscated that I actually wondered if those devs just wanted to make themselves indispensable. I really dislike such an attitude.
This is also in my case anywyay a barrier to entry or at least a point of intimidation. Where do I start? Which subsets are essential? Which version should I start with if I am learning today?
There are some domains and industries that break from these guidelines (or similar subsets) for various reasons, but generally speaking this is the sensible approach to take.
[0]: https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines
I believe in exactly the opposite. I always try to follow the KISS principle (Keep it simple, stupid) whenever possible since it always turned out to be the most reliable and maintainable solution.
It is funny that the first Ada versions (93 and 95) were considered vastly more complex in comparison to C++ in those days. Today it's the opposite. Ada looks like a clean mature language which only adds features which are actually needed. C++ wants to copy everything, attempting to squeeze every new feature into its narrow syntactic framework while still suffering the legacy of C and old C++ for reason of compatibility.
The only reason (IMHO) to learn C++ today is for maintaining legacy code in business. In all other cases there are better typed languages - Ada, Rust, and Nim for instance.
C++ may look nice at the basic level. As soon as things get serious C++ devs have a tough time. How does the experienced C++ dev fight that? He looks into his long list of tips and nostrums which hie collected in all his years to avoid all the pitfalls and minefields of C++. I don't believe that will change significantly with C++17.
And I do consider, that some of the strongest criticism of C++, and that is, "that most people use a subset of it, so it feels like many different languages glued into one", is actually a strength .. it means you can ignore some the complexity .. until you want it, or need it
I am very happy, that C++ is adding new features every 3 years .. and I do plan to invest more time in C++
Complexity is good