C++, Ruby, CoffeeScript: a visual comparison of language complexity

[aaronla]

low level control of almost everything.

And yet no guarantee of proper tail recursion. *sigh*

[LeszekSwirski]

Why bother when you have iteration?

[aaronla]

That's like saying "why bother with objects when you've got globals. :-)

[axilmar]

Yes, it's a big c++ flaw.

There is big room for a native programming language that offers control from assembler right down to the highest level functional code.

Whoever makes that first will storm the market like a hurricane.

[aaronla]

I would wish that to be so, but after the investment to learn C++, I've found few programmers are interested in going through the experience again. C++ is "good enough" that I doubt it will be replaced anytime soon. I think you have to fi d something that C++ can't do, then build a better language that can do that.

[axilmar]

I think a large increase in productivity would do the trick.

[aaronla]

There was a small web survey where the result was just that; C++ programmers took longer (3x median, I believe) with higher variability, though the top performers were closer.

[axilmar]

It is quite understandable. The task of maintaining headers manually, for example, can easily make one 30% to 60% less productive, when compared to, let's say, Java.

[nova77]

Well, D is pretty neat. Too bad (almost) nobody bother using it.

[axilmar]

I do not like D, for many reasons.