5
Programming languages are unconvincing (atleast C++, Java and its ilk, Smalltalk, Lisp) (leminal.space)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/programming@beehaw.org
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I feel proponents of any programming language put a lot of spin around what isolated aspects it is good for, but fail to illustrate what a programmer in even one target domain gains from using it.

Are there programming language implementations unlike what is described above, that you feel back up their marketing?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

You picked out my one argument where you have a (weak) counterargument and then declare there's no other arguments. Does not sound like you want to understand...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago*

    I did you the courtesy of replying with a bit of info about Erlang, even though you weren't addressing the actual point about lack of language features like Erlang's. BTW, by conceding that the argument for C++ on microcontrollers is weak given other languages doing better on that front, you are conceding that C++ doesn't have features to help systems programming.

    Arguments are being made for language platform features when the question of language features comes up. I doubt it has to do with people not understanding the question.

    More likely just scratching heads to find atleast 1 useful C++ (or any other mentioned language) feature that actually is useful to the domains professed to be "supported". This isn't an attack, I am in this boat too! The utility of its language features seems to be no more than "atleast it is not assembly".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent