Heath Provost (galvanash@hotmail.com) on 6/5/10 wrote:
>
>As for C++ exceptions - the same thing really applies here.
>They are trying to write explicit code. Exceptions are the
>poster child for implicit magic...

Yes, exceptions is a good example. The Linux kernel actually
does its own exception mechanism, exactly because that way
we control what is going on (and do it much more targeted
to the actual need in question while giving much better
performance and avoiding the crazy unwinding issues).

And I really do dislike C++. It's a really bad language, in
my opinion. It tries to solve all the wrong problems, and
does not tackle the right ones. The things C++ "solves"
are trivial things, almost purely syntactic extensions to
C rather than fixing some true deep problem.

(The C++ objects, templates and function overloading are
all just syntactic sugar. And generally bad syntax
at that. And C++ actually makes the C type system actively
worse.)

In non-systems programming, you should almost certainly
use a language that offers garbage collection. That will
possibly make a real difference in the complexity of
your application. The C++ features? Largely useless, and
just helps you screw up more.

And in systems programming, you're simply better off with
C. You'll have a way easier time using all the existing
code and libraries out there (re-using C++ code? Good
luck). Fewer headaches, fewer opportunities to mess up the
design and pick some unstable template library.

So in neither case is C++ likely the right choice.

Linus