Hacker News Reader

Comment by nindalf | Hacker News Reader

The article makes a mistake here in interpreting the results of the StackOverflow survey (https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2022/#technology-most-loved-...). Here’s the summary with respect to Rust

- 9.3% of respondents use Rust (#14)

- 87% of respondents who already use Rust would like to continue using Rust. (Most loved)

- 17.6% of respondents who don’t already use Rust would like to try out Rust (Most wanted)

While I generally agree with the sentiment that Rust can, should and probably will improve I don’t see the survey results or your anecdotal experience as cause for alarm.

It’s far from the most popular language (JS 65%) or most popular language without a runtime (C++ 22.5%). But that’s fine because it’s relatively new. The survey indicators a big appetite for trying out Rust among developers who haven’t tried it out already, indicating that the language could continue to grow in popularity.

View on HN

It's worth noting that Rust is about the same age as most of the modern C++ paradigms that you see all over C++ codebases these days. C++11 came out at around the same time as the Rust project reached bootstrapping, and C++14 came out less than a year before Rust 1.0.

It would not be an exaggeration to say that most of the C++ you use today is about the same age as Rust.

So even while working with modern C++, only 48% of developers want to continue working with it? And only 7.6% of developers want to learn it?

Pretty much, and for a few good reasons:

- Most C++ projects are not greenfield, and C++ programmers are often working with 10-20 years of cruft in their codebases.

- Most of those codebases are also somewhat object-oriented, and thereby tained with "enterprise Javaness."

- C++ has a number of high-profile detractors who are well-liked in the programming world, like Linus Torvalds and (in this sphere) Bryan Cantrill. Most of these detractors haven't touched C++ in 15-20 years and are still railing against the monstrosity that was C++03 and the thickness of the C++ spec (without actually using it).

- C++ is widely used, and often not in places where it is appropriate or useful. When people use something, they see its rough edges.

- C++ isn't "cool" in programming spheres.

> Most of these detractors haven't touched C++ in 15-20 years and are still railing against the monstrosity that was C++03 and the thickness of the C++ spec (without actually using it).

Keep in mind that C++ standard is backwards compatible, so every monstrosity added is still there. You might not use it, but your (ex-)colleagues might have, and you might end up maintaining such code. Let's just say it doesn't exactly make it more appealing.

I imagine that, at least for younger devs, game dev would be the only real motivation for learning C++

Or old (-ish, I'm early 40s). I'm back around to C/C++, haven't touched it since C++03 and C++11, having recently accepted a Senior+ role in gamesdev and moving away from a decade of backend work.

You have been quite fortunate. Most of the c++ I come across is c++98. Or at best c++11 features sprinkled into c++98 code.

That is a very good way to look at it.

Now, I am not a C++ dev, but how much effort would it be for a team to pick up C++ 20 if they only had worked with was C++ 11?

It's not that bad unless you're library writers.

The functional programming parts and expansion of compile-time metaprogramming (constexpr/templates) are probably the biggest new features, but you probably aren't going to use the more complex parts.

IMO the biggest changes in ergonomics for application writers are:

* better iterator-based algorithms and iterators becoming more powerful than indexes and pointers

* new helper objects like string_view that let you work more efficiently

* functional programming and passing lambdas around is possible

* "override void foo() const noexcept { ... }" - all the extra keywords (override, const, and noexcept) help you with correctness

Reply on news.ycombinator.com