Re:Cppfront, Herb Sutter's proposal for a new C++ syntax
by throwaway894345 on Sunday September 18, 2022 @09:51AM
(#32887546)
I agree that these things all use C++, but the parent’s claim was that there are areas (industries?) where C++ has no alternatives. Drivers and high performance systems can all make use of C, Rust, Ada, etc as well as C++ depending on requirements.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Cppfront, Herb Sutter's proposal for a new C++ syntax
by spookie on Sunday September 18, 2022 @10:37AM
(#32887920)
I'm sorry, but Rust still has ways to go before established industries believe on it enough to drop C/C++.
I use C/C++ interchangeably, since extending an existing C codebase won't be a problem.
Most aren't willing to go as far as Ada either, the reason why that even in military endeavors, C/C++ is used as a more familiar "face".
I think it's pretty easy to forget the foothold these languages have, and their flexibility. We all have seen the perseverance of COBOL.
Re:Cppfront, Herb Sutter's proposal for a new C++ syntax
by throwaway894345 on Sunday September 18, 2022 @11:30AM
(#32888361)
My original comment specifically said that older languages have staying power, and that Rust will have to mature a bit to become the language of choice for new projects in these niches. But even still, I wasn’t talking about dropping C++ for Rust—I only mentioned Rust as an alternate option.
Re:Cppfront, Herb Sutter's proposal for a new C++ syntax
by spookie on Sunday September 18, 2022 @12:23PM
(#32888815)
No problem, I just don't consider it as an alternative for the aforementioned concerns. Nonetheless, I wasn't trying to point fingers at Rust, more of a pragmatic approach to modernizing a code infrastructure.
I hope Rust does well.