 |
C++Talk.NET
C++ language newsgroups
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Eric
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 8:59 pm Post subject: How did C++ beat the competition? |
 |
|
I just read an old interview of Stroustrup here:
http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/news/alumni/win96/stroustrup.html
and found the following answer to "There's no next big thing then?",
very interesting:
<quote>
There are two theories for how C++ succeeded which are just plain
false. The first is that it succeeded simply because it was first. And
it wasn't. Simula was there. Smalltalk was there. Objective C was
there. Eiffel was there, and so was the Object-Oriented Pascal. It was
one of a group, and there were actually several that were before that.
It was not because I was first. Secondly, it is not because of the
marketing might of AT&T. We spent $3,000 popularizing it and marketing
for the first three years when it was commercially available.
</quote>
Since that is the case, then I am curious. How did C++ beat the
competition? (the word "beat" here refers to the relative
success/popularity of C++ to the other langages mentioned.)
The most obvious theory that comes to my mind, and one that Stroustrup
mentions in the interview, is that C++ had a larger prospective
audience in the form of the C community.
The second thing that comes to mind is efficiency, which is frequently
cited as an important advantage of C++. I choose to remain neutral
about whether C++ is faster/slower than the other languages mentioned,
in the hope of avoiding the deterioration of the discussion into one
that contains phrases like "but Moore's Law", "fast enough", "sure but
feature X is.." etc. Of greater interest is the relative performance
to Objective C since it is closer to C++ by virtue of its C heritage.
I also suspect that the feature set for C++ played a role, although I
don't have enough knowledge about the other languages to make an
accurate assessment.
Anybody else have any theories/ideas/facts?
Cheers,
Eric Mutta 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Victor Bazarov
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 10:28 pm Post subject: Re: How did C++ beat the competition? |
|
|
"Eric" <ericmuttta (AT) email (DOT) com> wrote...
| Quote: | [...]
I am curious. How did C++ beat the
competition? [...]
|
One cannot really point out a single reason or a couple of
language features that made C++ what it is today. It's by
all means a combination of factors, where language features
played a significant part, but also availability of potential
competitors, willingness and readiness of compiler vendors
to add another language to their packages, etc. Besides,
the reasons why C++ is gaining popularity today are probably
different than they were ten or more years ago.
I do prefer simply using the language than trying to figure
out why it's so. :-)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cy Edmunds
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 11:58 pm Post subject: Re: How did C++ beat the competition? |
|
|
"Eric" <ericmuttta (AT) email (DOT) com> wrote
| Quote: | I just read an old interview of Stroustrup here:
http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/news/alumni/win96/stroustrup.html
and found the following answer to "There's no next big thing then?",
very interesting:
quote
There are two theories for how C++ succeeded which are just plain
false. The first is that it succeeded simply because it was first. And
it wasn't. Simula was there. Smalltalk was there. Objective C was
there. Eiffel was there, and so was the Object-Oriented Pascal. It was
one of a group, and there were actually several that were before that.
It was not because I was first. Secondly, it is not because of the
marketing might of AT&T. We spent $3,000 popularizing it and marketing
for the first three years when it was commercially available.
/quote
Since that is the case, then I am curious. How did C++ beat the
competition? (the word "beat" here refers to the relative
success/popularity of C++ to the other langages mentioned.)
The most obvious theory that comes to my mind, and one that Stroustrup
mentions in the interview, is that C++ had a larger prospective
audience in the form of the C community.
The second thing that comes to mind is efficiency, which is frequently
cited as an important advantage of C++. I choose to remain neutral
about whether C++ is faster/slower than the other languages mentioned,
in the hope of avoiding the deterioration of the discussion into one
that contains phrases like "but Moore's Law", "fast enough", "sure but
feature X is.." etc. Of greater interest is the relative performance
to Objective C since it is closer to C++ by virtue of its C heritage.
I also suspect that the feature set for C++ played a role, although I
don't have enough knowledge about the other languages to make an
accurate assessment.
Anybody else have any theories/ideas/facts?
Cheers,
Eric Mutta
|
I think one major factor was the commonality with C. You can get a C
compiler on just about any platform, and early C++ compilers just emitted C
code. That had to help get it started.
But I think what made C++ last was the degree of control you have with it.
Everything from the object model to memory management is actually very low
level. That gives you lots of options, but downside is that the language is
fairly complex and can be tricky to use. I think that is why the regulars on
this newsgroup sometimes seem like nitpickers -- C++ can get you in a lot of
trouble if you use it carelessly.
--
Cy
http://home.rochester.rr.com/cyhome/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
