From: Simon Buchan (simon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-29 18:53:23
Sorry, I had to reply to this!
Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
> "Andy Little" <andy_at_[hidden]> wrote
>>The builtin GUI is a major reason for Java's Success.
> I think the major reason for Java's (commersial) success is that it has
> _commersial_ forces behind it. As opposed to C++, that is mainly moved
> forward by academics and enthusiasts.
(I think you mean commercial)
You forgot pretty much every industry that needs to have programs that
_work_, and quickly, ie. every telephone system in the world has some
C++, normally a /LOT/ of it, controlling routing, etc... A large sector
of the commercial software industry uses C++ (all of Adobe's programs,
for example). If you've played a computer game in the last 5 years, it
*was* written in C++. C++ is almost always at or near the top of the
list of languages that are being considered to implement a new project.
I would die of old age before I could list everyone who uses C++.
I'm sure Stroustrup is kicking himself for not making C++ "commercial".
Why, he could have 700,000 programmers using C++ *right now*, just like
Java (claims)! As opposed to the 1.5 million he currently has.
> If we were to make C++ commersially successfull, we would now be developing
> threads, all kinds of networking, and database access, like crazy. But
> since we are here mostly to have fun, gain an experience, write articles,
> etc., we are busy with MPL and PP, lambdas and binders, parsers and regular
> expressions, foreach and typeof, etc., etc., etc. Things that are cool, and
> useful for language development, but hardly ever considered when somebody
> has to decide in which language to implement a distributed concurrent
Oh yes, it's nearly /impossible/ to get a database, networking or
threading library for C++. And I'm sure no one will ever find a use for
parsers or regular expressions. And gosh! MPL! What a waste of time
to let the compiler do all the work for you!
OK, enough sarcasm. (Don't take it too seriously)
> (I hope nobody gets offended. The above libraries are provided for example
> only, and without any hint to their relative importance)
> As for GUI, the last time I saw a portable one, it sucked. Yes, I admit, it
> was 5 years ago, and it was AWT, so maybe thins changed drammatically? Are
> modern GUI libraries really able to produce _decent_ cross-platform GUI?
Yep. See other posts here for details.
The /real/ reason Java is successful is because they have a pretty good
marketing team. They don't try to sell Java to programmers (the last
thing we need is yet another language based on C++, but proprietary).
Oh no, they sell Java to managers. Having a lot of money to sell it
with helps as well.
Don't take this the wrong way. All I mean is just because you don't see
full page ads for how C++ will help your business in every industry
newsletter, doesn't mean it's not doing well. (Although you won't be
hard pressed to find PR guys to tell you it's a "legacy" language. I
wonder who they work for?)
No, I don't make money on C++, apart from programming in the language ;-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk