On Tuesday, 30 January 2018 at 22:43:32 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 January 2018 at 21:49:39 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
"extremely eefficient native code". I don't argue that C++
has extremely efficient native code. But so has D. So the
claim that C++ has an "enormous performance advantage" over D
is specious.
We also need to keep in mind that for a small segment of C++
programmers it is important to be able to use CPU/SoC/hardware
vendor backed compilers so that they can ship optimized code
the day a new CPU is available. So there is a distinct
advantage there for people who don't aim for consumer CPUs.
Most programmers don't care as much, since adoption of new CPUs
is slow enough for GCC/Clang to catch up in time.
Anyway, as C++ is taking more and more of C's niche, this issue
can be more an more "threatening". E.g. hardware vendors that
now only ship C compilers might in the future only ship C++
compilers... I don't know exactly where this is going, but it
is possible that C++ could become hard to displace for hardware
oriented programming. Seems like more an more embedded
programming is moving to C++ from C.
BMW has a few talks from 2017 talking about them and the
remaining car manufacturers finally moving away from C into C++11
(on a 2nd talk they refer C++14).
They are also taking care that car electronic standard
certifications move to C++.
Sony did a similar one regarding embedded electronics.
CodePlay just started a similar work for MISRA.
So with those companies only now leaving C and moving into C++,
it will take at least a decade before they consider something
else.
And lets not forget Arduino, ESP286 and ESP32 are making wonders
for the kids to jump into C++ as their first language.
