It's time that graybeard C++/Java devs embrace the

>comparing enterprise solutions with fart apps

Oh yea, fuck these old C++ and Java programmers, god so old, am I in the Cool hipster developers club yet?

>>60682107
hipsters tend to stick to retro trash

>>60682124
Hipsters usually go against what other people are doing, and they really like to remind those people that they do it.

>>60682022
>cloud-native
>good
Yeah, that's why the entirety of transportation system in Japan is written in fucking Assembly.

Modern languages are implicit as fuck and thus cannot be trusted to perform reliably.

>>60682174
>implying using Arch makes me a hipster

>>60682213
Arch is pretty popular, not as obscure as it was not so long ago.

>>60682210
Your delusions indicate you have no idea what you're talking about

>>60682174
So basically denying technological progress and sticking to older stuff?

>>60682022
Go seems to only have a niche for server applications.

Rust's popularity has waned since the lead guy started advocating the killing of white people and alienating the majority of potential developers

>>60682213
You could've said
> implying using software I prefer makes me a hipster
instead of virtue signalling.

>>60682210
Can you provide prove?

File: 1473473187775.png (645KB, 967x541px) Image search: [Google]

645KB, 967x541px

>>60682174
Hipsters eat whatever shit corporations engineered for them like every other group of morons

60682273
Wrong board
>>>/pol/

>>60682282
*proof fuck

>>60682279
>le virtue signal buzzword maymay

>>60682270
Older stuff is usually more reliable.

>>60682308
Not inherently

>>60682290
kys kike

Grow up

File: 1478728918015.jpg (156KB, 1000x990px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1000x990px

>>60682283
top fucking cuck
look like he has cigarettes hanging out his hears
fucking hell this looks stupid

>>60682022
you mean Rust/Kotlin?

The reason that Rust hasnt taken off yet is that its a complicated language that uses Ocaml systematics alone with a memory model of ownership and borrowing that requires an entirely new way of programming. There are not many professional programmers who willing to invest their time on a language that so far has not been used on any large scale products.

Go is a more proven language but is still a major shift out of the conventional Java/C#/C++ OO languages. It incorporates a lot of syntax style features that are found in dynamic scripting languages much like Swift does. People who have only programmed in static compiled languages and never got an in depth understanding of dynamic langauges might have a hard time appreciating what Go and Swift have to offer.

C++ is going to continue to be favored because it combines OO with unrestricted use of C pointers. Pointers in C a long with the unrestricted type system and non checked array boundaries gives all the power to programmers to force their way out of any problem. The fact that pointers give unrestricted access means you dont have to think about scope and syntax rules (that much), you always have direct control over anything. In my opinion this makes programmers lazy and undisciplined. Others might say this makes programmers more inventive and thoughtful about their programs. People make a big deal about OO an template metaprogramming in C++, both those things offer a certain amount of organization to code, but for the most part everyone who programs in C++ invents their own version of it and can always escape any OO and template restraints just by holding on to things with pointers and passing pointers around.

Go is pretty interesting. I've tinkered with it some for fun. Not sold on using it professionally yet but if my product group went all in, I'd happily Go in too.

No to Rust. I'm a guy and don't wear dresses or want to kill my coworkers for having different political beliefs.

And then the cloud provider fucks you over and you have to either rewrite the app in another vendor-specific technology, or go bankrupt.

>>60682022
Cool pick. I don't think Java/C++ devs are going anywhere soon, tho.

>>60682095
>last.fm
>twitter
>github
>bitbucket
>hey look at all those fartapps
fag pls

>>60682340
>k*ke
>>>/pol//

>>60684954
kys kike

>>60682313
true but having your product judged completely with minimal/no FPGA and online patching meant that getting it right the first time held a shit-ton more weight

>I remember when version 2.0 meant something significant, not the day after launch.

>Rust
Maybe.

>Go
Go away.

>ror
My sides

>>60685187
Agreed. Go is not very exciting to me. Lightweight, less safe languages are NOT the future.

>>60684841
>look at all those fatapps
Yeah, notice how none of them actually turn a profit.

Why is Rust associated to social just warriors?

And what is the deal with Go?

>>60685629
Why is windows associated with pajeets?

>>60685629
>And what is the deal with Go?
It's easy to learn and has good features so people don't like it, the people that do like it don't argue with the other people because there's better things to be doing like writing programs. There's nothing to complain about either so it's not talked about a lot, all the issues people do bring up are simply a result of them not reading the tiny spec or not knowing good practices in other languages.

>oh no I have to handle errors and I don't know how
>there's no generics and I don't understand metaprograming even with a built in parser and standard lexer tools
>I hate that it's safe and don't know about the unsafe package
>I wish I could write and interact with C code but don't know that cgo exists
etc.

>>60685735
Wait but generics are a valid option. It's a bit of a regression. Shouldn't we be dealing with higher order type systems? I like some of what Go has to offer and I hope more languages follow the trend of offering sugar/simple syntax at a lower level. Writing Go almost feels like writing in a scripting language sometimes because it flows so well. But the typing just isn't there for me. Can't we have Go with a dope type system?

>>60685788
Given the common comparison is C++'s templates, I really don't understand it. You can easily write similar code, and parse it with `go generate` to produce automatic output that works the same way. You should probably be using interfaces in these cases anyway and constraining the types to only what will actually be handled properly much like you should with templates and methods on them. When both interfaces and go generate are used in tandem it seems much more correct to me, although that's just preference, for all intents and purposes the solution should be on par with templates, it takes a tiny bit more effort to write the generate code but it makes it much easier to understand and specifically debug, plus you only have to do it once.

People in the go world complain about the empty interface and that's honestly what C++ templates feel like 90% of the time I work on anyone elses C++ project, you can do great things with C++ templates but sometimes they can be crazy, the restrictions in Go make it feel like you're forced to write something that actually works and is understandable by a third party 100% of the time.

In addition there are tools out there now that add generic support to Go if you don't want to do it yourself.

Maybe I'm crazy though.

>Can't we have Go with a dope type system?
Maybe Go2 will suite more people.

>>60682210
Assembly is implicit as fuck. I can't even control the gates and signals myself.
Thus assembly cannot be trusted to perform reliably.

>>60685620
>notice how none of them actually turn a profit.
REKT
E
K
T

>>60685982
Computers are implicit as fuck

>>60685620
damn...

>>60682022
That's a great pic. lol at the project managers, long dead