I haven't read much of any of this, but will respond succinctly to the title.

Why c/c++? Control. I can make very powerful type agnostic constructs that optimize very heavily for performance. I can also implement my own memory safety constructs as a matter of regimented course (internal design policy) e.g. to catch common mistakes that might happen at the higher level invocations... effectively building my own safety mechanisms into the language.

Is it more work? Yes. Is it easier to blow my own leg off with the complete freedom? Yes. Am I willing to outsource these elements to a third party? No.    

Am I Luddite? I have embraced certain elements of the newer c++ standards, so I don't believe so. Features I find particularly useful in newer c++ versions are "constant evaluation functions" (a function that runs at compile time to produce a constant) and compiler hints to sort/prevent collisions with operator precedence (e.g. "explicit" keyword).

As a general heuristic I prefer not to spend time on things (e.g. dealing with other language constructs) if I know in advance that they are going to likely and repeatedly interfere with my prime directive: control.

If anything, c++ is the opposite extreme of control... and I have to tighten my own implementation standards to create a safe environment. I am fine with doing so. Others are not.


On Thursday, August 8th, 2024 at 2:51 PM, Hendrik Boom <hendrik@???> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 09:35:50AM -0500, o1bigtenor via Dng wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 8, 2024 at 8:52 AM Dan Purgert via Dng dng@???
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Aug 08, 2024, David Billsbrough wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello Dan and all,
> > > >
> > > > Quoting somebody on this mail list:
> > > >
> > > > > If you're trying to start up a new hobby, and expect to be using these
> > > > > tools every weekend; well, you're going to need that set of $40 tools
> > > > > when the $5 set breaks / ruins something / whatever. Might as well
> > > > > spend the $40 today instead of $5 today and $40 anyway in 2 months.
> > > >
> > > > [...] Tool prices, etc. comments. [...]
> > > > SO anyways ...
> > > >
> > > > In the virtual (digital) world this idea does' NOT also work the
> > > > same way at all.
> > > >
> > > > You can use FREE (beer or speech) software that meets and exceeds some
> > > > or most TOP dollar software offerings. Well because that just the
> > > > way that it is!
> > >
> > > You completely misunderstood the analogy I'm making...
> > >
> > > Scenario: OP is fighting with Python a bit in order to use MicroPython
> > > (or a variant thereto) to program a microcontroller.
> > >
> > > I'm telling him that IF he's trying to do this as more than a
> > > "one-off", he might as well learn C/C++ (via Arduino) now, rather than
> > > waiting on it.
> > >
> > > Python = "Cheap tool" (It'll get the job done, if all you need is this
> > > one thing)
> > >
> > > C/C++ = "Expensive tool" (It'll "hurt the wallet", but you'll have it
> > > forever).
> > >
> > > I wasn't going to bite but you keep insisting so:
> >
> > Why is C/C++ so absolutely wonderful?
>
>
> Primarily because C (not C++) has been around for a longer time
> than most other tools. Old enough that it was around when Linux got
> written and it has become the interlingua for Linux software.
>
> Not because it's a great language.
>
> It was a breath of fresh air in the 1970's, but by now language
> technology has advanced a lot since then.
>
> Still, to interface with anything at the level of C, you need
> something that will work at that level, be it C or some other
> systems language. I would have been happy if Modula 3 had
> caught on the way C did, but it didn't.
>
> -- hendrik
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng