News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Popular Myths about C++, Part 2 by k__ on Monday December 15, 2014 @10:00AM (#8752266)
> What I tend to think people mean when they say that, is that you have some cycles to "waste" on a simpler language.

Isn't C simpler than C++ and doesn't waste cycles?

The only "no other option" scenario I could imagine is, legacy code in C++ or using a framework that needs C++.

Re:Popular Myths about C++, Part 2 by maxlybbert on Monday December 15, 2014 @10:51AM (#8752552)
> Isn't C simpler than C++ and doesn't waste cycles?

I gave a couple of C++ books to a recent CS graduate. She assured me that C++ would be easy to pick up because it has a much smaller standard library than Java. I smiled but didn't say any anything.

Yes, C is simpler than C++. But that simplicity comes with a cost, mainly that the programmer has to keep track of more details. And the C standard library is smaller than the C++ standard library (and that would be true even if the C++ standard library didn't include the C standard library).

Re:Popular Myths about C++, Part 2 by Dewie on Monday December 15, 2014 @10:02AM (#8752274)
> Isn't C simpler than C++ and doesn't waste cycles?

I should have added "and also high level". I did that now.