[boost] Reason for C++'s Success (was: Reason for Java's Success)

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
> system.
> 
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 ;-)