• Forum
  • Lounge
  • C++ is a horrible language ~ Linus Torva

 
C++ is a horrible language ~ Linus Torvalds

Pages: 123
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/57918

thought?
Troll. :/

A problem I have with Linus is that he rants about C++ without much evidence to back his claims up, specifically the one about the STL being unstable and unportable. He may be right that C++ does require more experience before you can write good code (and as a result many programmers might have problems with it), and he might be right that your average C programmer will better understand system-level issues than an average C++ programmer, but honestly, I haven't met a programmer yet who doesn't make mistakes. If anything, I would think that C methodologies make one more prone to errors than C++ methodologies.

On a final note, maybe C++ isn't as good as C for system-level programming, but Git isn't exactly a system-level app, is it? ;)

-Albatross
Last edited on
He has a point. I find C more malleable when I need to change things.

Edit:
I probably mean that I find it easier to do large scale changes in a procedural paradigm than an oBject oriented one.
Last edited on
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
Git isn't a system-level application per-se, but one of Linus' explicitly intentions when writing it initially was 'system-level performance'.

He has a point about Boost (not so much modern STL) though, writing my undergraduate thesis in MD simulations I needed to use Visual Studio because the toolkit I was using didn't provide MinGW libraries...but my supervisor used a Mac, so he needed things to compile and run on that platform.

STL code was pretty much a no-brainer, but Boost was such a nightmare getting the same code to even compile on both machines that we just dropped boost entirely.
Linus may be a great programmer, but he's also a complete douchebag. (Or at least, that's how he comes across)

The first paragraph in that link is enough to discredit him completely. He's so self-righteous and arrogant that he blinds himself to the obvious flaws in his so-called logic. That whole post basically reads like a 3rd grader plugging his ears and going "I know you are but what am I".

He's like the angry video game nerd -- except he makes very few good points and isn't funny.

I'm glad I'll never have to work with him.
Last edited on
My first thought is that this is a repost... Anyway, Linus is a dinosaur. He exhibits his own ignorance in his writing and it speaks very loudly.
Troll
douchebag
self-righteous and arrogant
dinosaur

Do you consider yourselves among those "substandard programmers" he mentions?
I guess I'm strawmaning but I'm intrigued as to what fuels your indignation.

Anyway, Linus is against high-level complexity and OOP. That's what his post digests to...
If I understand correctly, one of his main points is that you should not trust anything but your own code, which, inevitably leads to reinventing the wheel. And the tire. And the engine. And so on.

Linus Torvalds wrote:
The fact that
we also piss off people who cannot see that is just a big additional
advantage.

The fact that he uses piss off and substandard or any derogatory remarks in just about every sentence makes me question the initial purpose of writing that mail. (To make a point or to piss off people, which he seems to like so much.)
Linus Torvalds has quipped about the name "git", which is British English slang for a stupid or unpleasant person: "I'm an egotistical bastard, and I name all my projects after myself. First Linux, now git."(Note that Torvalds did not in fact name Linux.)


Do you consider yourselves among those "substandard programmers" he mentions?


Probably, yeah. I get the impression he considers everyone but himself a substandard programmer.

I'm intrigued as to what fuels your indignation.


Did you read the post? He basically spouts off reasons of why C++ is crap and anyone who disagrees with his opinion is not only wrong, but also stupid and a bad programmer (also note: he sees pissing these people off as a good thing).

He's a hate monger. So I'll play ball. If he wants to hate the world, then I, as part of the world, will gladly hate him right back.

Also, most of the reasons he gives as to why C++ is crap are double standards. They could just as easily be said about C.

(That last sentence wasn't really true -- I was getting his rant mixed up with another person's rant)
Last edited on
How come this old story is suddenly rehashed on every other forum?
Did it get a major news portal's attention after all these years?
@Disch,
Tbh I wouldn't say he was that great a programmer. He is good, but more and more I get the impression that Linux is only so big because of other people. The Linux 0.01 code, for example, is absolutely awful. It's funny how he talks about the C++ STL being unportable when he writes functions that are half-C half-embedded-ASM. Maybe he's changed his ways but still, talk about double standards...
@Catfish
I was actually referring to darkestfright and not Linus with the "Troll" comment. No offense, darkestfright, but honestly... you must have known what posting that link here might do. *knowing wink*

-Albatross
Last edited on
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
Some people just want to watch the world burn ;)

I get the impression he considers everyone but himself a substandard programmer.


In his Git Tech Talk at Google, he makes it pretty clear that he believes this to be true, he basically says "When I'm talking about Git, if you don't agree with me you are ugly and stupid".


EDIT:

I also find it funny that C++ creates unmaintainable messy code. Let's not forget that this message is in the context of Git, a program written in a multitude of different languages: C, Tcl, Ruby, Shell Scripts just off the top of my head.

I've looked at the source: C code which invoke Shell scripts, which generate Ruby scripts that are executed.
What a disaster.
Last edited on
That does sound stupid. I thought it was just C and shell scripts which would be a logical mixture.
darkestfright wrote:
One of Linus' explicitly intentions when writing [Git] initially was 'system-level performance'
darkestfright wrote:
I've looked at the source: C code which invoke Shell scripts, which generate Ruby scripts that are executed.


Hehehe. ;)

-Albatross
Last edited on
Just another programmer bitching about a language he doesn't use. I see a lot of programmers go on about the languages they don't use. I don't use a lot of languages, but difference with me is that I want to learn a lot of them and don't bash them at all.
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
Just goes to show how much of a hypocrite he can be.
Boost was such a nightmare getting the same code to even compile on both machines that we just dropped boost entirely
Just out of curiosity, why is that?
I find it very interesting that people are slagging off Torvalds for what most of you would probably do anyway.

Torvalds created a project using the language of his choice. When someone questions that choice of-course he is going to react. After all, he is in his own words "an egotistical bastard".

How many time has there been someone questioning the use of C++ here, Scalar/Java/etc could do it much better, to be met with days of bashing the other language and users there of?
Pages: 123