Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="David Brown, post: 5162182"] It's certainly true that all these items have their place - they can be used, as well as abused. Interesting questions. I could come up with /some/ answers, but /good/ answers would require a lot of thought. One obvious point is that if a language offers a lot of choice and features, people are going to use features that they think are interesting or "cool", even if they are not necessarily the best options. And if a language is big, it is hard for people to know everything - they are going to pick options that are sub-optimal or overly complex, simply because they are not aware of better options. In a centralised and tightly organised development environment, that may be true. In a more loose projects, such as is common in many widespread open source projects, there is not such a clear distinction between the high-level designers and the low-level coders. People often get involved in different parts of the project, and submit code for comment, improvement, and inclusion in the project. My point is that if a mediocre C programmer submits some code, a more experienced developer can often make suggestions or fixes that get the code up to the quality they are looking for. But with C++ code, there is a greater chance that the type of abstractions and structure chosen by the relative beginner (either beginner to C++, or beginner to the project) simply does not fit well with the project, and the code will be unfixable. I agree - for a company. Agreed. I can't say how much it is a problem, and how much it is just perceived to be a problem - but either way it is a problem. [/QUOTE]

Verification