In Defense of C++

This is a good article but it only scratches the surface, as is always the case when it comes to C++.

When I made a meme about C++ [1] I was purposeful in choosing the iceberg format. To me it's not quite satisfying to say that C++ is merely complex or vast. A more fitting word would be "arcane", "monumental" or "titanic" (get it?). There's a specific feeling you get when you're trying to understand what the hell is an xvalue, why std::move doesn't move or why std::remove doesn't remove.

The Forest Gump C++ is another meme that captures this feeling very well (not by me) [2].

What it comes down to is developer experience (DX), and C++ has a terrible one. Down to syntax and all the way up to package management a C++ developper feels stuck to a time before they were born. At least we have a lot of time to think about all that while our code compiles. But that might just be the price for all the power it gives you.

[1] https://victorpoughon.github.io/cppiceberg/

[2] https://mikelui.io/img/c++_init_forest.gif

In Linuxland you at least have pkg-config to help with package management. It's not perfect but neither is any other package management solution.

If I'm writing a small utility or something the Makefile typically looks something like this:

    CC=clang
    PACKAGES=libcurl libturbojpeg
    CFLAGS=-Wall -pedantic --std=gnu17 -g $(shell pkg-config --cflags $(PACKAGES))
    LDLIBS=$(shell pkg-config --libs $(PACKAGES))

    ALL: imagerunner

    imagerunner: imagerunner.o image_decoder.o downloader.o

Consider that to do this you must:

- Use a build system like make, you can't just `c++ build`

- Understand that C++ compilers by default have no idea where most things are, you have to tell them exactly where to search

- Use an external tool that's not your build system or compiler to actually inform the compiler what those search paths are

- Oh also understand the compiler doesn't actually output what you want, you also need a linker

- That linker also doesn't know where to find things, so you need the external tool to use it

- Oh and you still have to use a package manager to install those dependencies to work with pkg-config, and it will install them globally. If you want to use it in different projects you better hope you're ok with them all sharing the same version.

Now you can see why things like IDEs became default tools for teaching students how to write C and C++, because there's no "open a text editor and then `c++ build file.cpp` to get output" for anything except hello world examples.

It's really not that big of a deal once you know how it works, and there are tools like CMake and IDEs that will take care of it.

On Windows and OSX it's even easier - if you're okay writing only for those platforms.

It's more difficult to learn, and it seems convoluted for people coming from Python and Javascript, but there are a lot of advantages to not having package management and build tooling tightly integrated with the language or compiler, too.

I agree -- I've been at it long enough -- cmake etc makes stuff pretty darn easy.

But in industrial settings where multi groups share and change libs something like debpkg may be used. You add caching and you can go quite deep quickly esp after bolting on cdci.

One must cop to the fact that a go build or zig build is just fundamentally better.

Go build is fundamentally better? How so? Go build is so light on features that adding generated files to source control is a norm in go land.