Is this true?

>>58801552
This is what kids think when they learn how to make hello world in C++ for the first time

File: js.png (17KB, 344x390px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 344x390px

>>58801552
Replace C++ with pic related and it is

C++ IS TRASH

Write a program that reads a file and creates some objects of types X and Y, then put those objects in the same container. Now iterate over that container the object is of type X call method A, if the object is of type Y call method B. Now pass that container around make copies of it and the like.

Now in a separate file to where you defined X and Y (or a common supercalass) extend them with a method C.

Here's something a bit harder: Read a file with C++ program text into a string. Now compile that string into a function and call it.

Finally write a function that accepts as its argument another, arbitrary, function (which returns a numerical value), and an argument number (assume the argument is numerical), and returns a function which is that functions derivative with respect to the argument number.

>>58801552
Good programers use the right tool for the job. If you're writing code that is time critical or will run often you use c++ if your writing code that will run once to solve a problem python is faster to write

>>58801552
Change C++ to C and you may have something

>>58801567

Unless the software you want on the web is a UI in itself, like Google Docs, you don't actually need javashit. Minimize its use totally.

The ``web app'' can still by dynamic--just serve everything from the server as nice compact html files. The user changes the state of something, serve a new html page.

``B-b-bbbut muh AJAX calls can make it more like a real program!'' Forget it. The only reason you need to make AJAX calls when the user changes state and then modify the original page based on the response, is because loading a new page with all your javashit will take forever. This is the solution to a problem that's caused by itself: javashit. If you would just remove all <script> tags and serve plain HTML and CSS, loading a new page would take just as long or less than the AJAX query. Besides, a new page for a new state in your application is much more intuitive.

It's time to end the cargo cult mentality of making websites that rely on javashit. When it comes to websites, you're sacrificing the most important resource (network resources) for the sake of some eye candy and phony UX bells and whistles, which users don't really care about.

Craigslist and Amazon are one of the few websites who know what they're doing. They both work very well without javascript. It automatically works perfectly well on mobile devices with very little customization only for mobile, because it's regular html that has worked forever. The big problem about browser and device compatibility in the javashit world is nullified by simply not using javashit.

Using javashit to make a ``web app'' introduces massive complexity. The worst part is that it's totally unnecessary, nothing but an exercise in vanity.

>>58801627
>serve and render an entirely new page instead of a 200 byte JSON response
Sounds like a good plan.

>>58801572
>Write a program that reads a file and creates some objects of types X and Y, then put those objects in the same container. Now iterate over that container the object is of type X call method A, if the object is of type Y call method B. Now pass that container around make copies of it and the like.
>
>Now in a separate file to where you defined X and Y (or a common supercalass) extend them with a method C.

ooooor you could just read the file.
You're making it hard for yourself

>>58801627
>Craigslist and Amazon are one of the few websites who know what they're doing. They both work very well without javascript
I can see how Craigslist wouldn't use JavaScript, but how would Amazon not? It looks like something that would break with NoScript. Especially with all of the buttons and the image viewer/zoomer on the page.

>>58801572
>Read a file with C++ program text into a string. Now compile that string into a function and call it.
WE DON'T SPEAK SCRIPT, NIGGA

>>58801648
Meta programming is shit in sepples and will always be

C++ is a horrible language. It's made more horrible by the fact that a lot
of substandard programmers use it, to the point where it's much much
easier to generate total and utter crap with it. Quite frankly, even if
the choice of C were to do *nothing* but keep the C++ programmers out,
that in itself would be a huge reason to use C.
C++ leads to really really bad design choices. You invariably start using
the "nice" library features of the language like STL and Boost and other
total and utter crap, that may "help" you program, but causes:

- infinite amounts of pain when they don't work (and anybody who tells me
that STL and especially Boost are stable and portable is just so full
of BS that it's not even funny)

- inefficient abstracted programming models where two years down the road
you notice that some abstraction wasn't very efficient, but now all
your code depends on all the nice object models around it, and you
cannot fix it without rewriting your app.

In other words, the only way to do good, efficient, and system-level and
portable C++ ends up to limit yourself to all the things that are
basically available in C. And limiting your project to C means that people
don't screw that up, and also means that you get a lot of programmers that
do actually understand low-level issues and don't screw things up with any
idiotic "object model" crap.

So I'm sorry, but for something like git, where efficiency was a primary
objective, the "advantages" of C++ is just a huge mistake. The fact that
we also piss off people who cannot see that is just a big additional
advantage.

If you want a VCS that is written in C++, go play with Monotone. Really.
They use a "real database". They use "nice object-oriented libraries".
They use "nice C++ abstractions". And quite frankly, as a result of all
these design decisions that sound so appealing to some CS people, the end
result is a horrible and unmaintainable mess.

>>58801627
this is all very wrong

the RTT delay alone will make transacting html pages slower than asynchronous XHRs and then modifying the DOM in place.

also APIs are more semantic than html in terms of scraping.

>>58801572
When you're doing systems programming no one is passing around "containers" and all your object oriented bullshit. You're writing actual registers and dealing with memory and caches.

>>58801627
Craigslist is borderline unusable without javascript.

>>58801572
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2fhNVQPb5I

>>58801703
You just have not achieved Satori yet

>>58801738
Maybe in c++17.

>>58801692
this is a moronic post if i've ever seen one

>>58801816
Yup, the guy that wrote it is a known retard:

http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/c++/linus

no lol

File: 1475985749400.png (146KB, 500x560px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 500x560px

>First guy
Web Developer
>Second guy
Software engineer looking at the state of web development

File: fast-reliable-typed.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

Why are we still having these debates. Rust writes like a nicer python (types) and feels like a saner C++ (not C++).

>>58801552
>when you slice an object, but a python programmer doesn't see a problem with that

>>58802776
Wouldn't touch with a pole.