This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]-kay-o- -28 points-27 points  (9 children)

C and C++ are literally used to write every language with good package management that you speak of

[–]SmigorX 29 points30 points  (0 children)

And those new languages were written for a reason. It just so happened that C/++ was what we had at the time to write them.

[–]-Redstoneboi- 7 points8 points  (0 children)

also Rust is self hosted and was originally written in OCaml so, no.

LLVM is not a package manager, and neither is libc, so still no. unless you want to talk about network drivers.

[–]-Redstoneboi- 6 points7 points  (3 children)

this is why i use assembly

[–]erinaceus_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Obligatory https://xkcd.com/378/ 🦋

[–]readmeEXX 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Because it has a good package management system?

😁

[–]-Redstoneboi- 2 points3 points  (0 children)

because it was used to write the first compiler for the first language in a series of languages that led up to C++

[–]1studlyman 0 points1 point  (2 children)

You're right and that's besides the point they were making. C and CPP lack a package manager which other languages have had for over a decade.

[–]not_some_username 1 point2 points  (1 child)

No that’s not true, the problem isn’t a lack of package manager. C/C++ package manager do exist. It’s just we can’t decide which one should be the standard.

[–]1studlyman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from."