so Wrote: > > Here's another perspective: > > A professor that teaches introduction to CS in first semester to > > students that never programmed before needs to choose a programing > > language. One of the criteria for choosing which language to use is of > > course the learning curve. > > I'm sure you know that not all universities choose c/c++ for this. In > > fact, I know of several universities that use scheme as that first > > programming language. > > C++ is complex, it is obvious why it is harder to learn. > Other languages don't have this mostly because they are not as powerful (i > don't think i need to explain this). > And this is what i mean, the reason its complexity, not the building > blocks we are talking about. (again, i don't believe this syntax has > anything to do with C++ being complex).
C++ is indeed complex and one of the reasons is its syntax (believe it or not). There was even an academic project to re-syntax C++ with the exact same semantics. Of course it's not the only cause of complexity in C++ but it is definitely one of the main ones. C++'s complexity has nothing to do with it's "power". D is as powerful and is less complex to use which is why we are here and not on the C++ dev mailing list. for example, D's classes/structs are way better than equivalent c++ code.
