Hacker News Reader

Comment by nielsbot | Hacker News Reader

I get your point and I like driving a manual car, but there’s a reason the whole world has switched to automatic

Perhaps not always for the better?

People eating, drinking and using mobile phones .. I think the luxury of having a hand free with automatic transmission is a contributing factor.

Stick shift requires a certain level of attention/engagement that might actually make for safer driving IMO.

I mean it's an analogy, so it's not directly the original comparison. I hate C++ but I concede it's possible to get the most performance from C++ if you are diligent. My argument there would be: Ok, use C++ and C (or even machine code) for the most performance sensitive parts, but then use a safer easier language everywhere else.

I am sorry, I was only thinking about the analogy and not the original topic :-)

As a motorcycle rider, inattentive car drivers are a sore subject.

As for C++, I agree with your last comment. I guess without the gravitation pull of a large existing C++ code base or an existing team of experts or as essential library, there is not much incentive to start new projects in C++.

I too am a firm believer in multiple layers, each possibly using different language/paradigm. I find the functional core with controlled and imperative edges approach very appealing.

There's essentially no learning curve moving from manual to automatic. But moving from C/C++ to Rust, there's a big learning curve.

So not the perfect analogy--my point is the "manual" version isn't always better than the "automatic" version.

For one thing, manual transmissions require physical activity and coordination. That's not true with programming languages...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com