I used to love C and then C++. For about 13 years those were my mains. I developed some complex applications with C++. They were extremely compact and efficient. I thought life was pretty good. Then one day I was tasked with simultaneously developing and maintaining parallel C/C++ and C# versions of the same large product. I quickly realized how much C++ sucked compared to how software development could and should be. What to hate about C++? There's so much. Overly complex and poorly thought out language design, header files, pre-compiled header files, the preprocessor, memory bugs (stability, security, nondeterministic behavior, etc), the relative unproductiveness, the linker, makefiles, terrible implementation of generics, STL, STL error messages (I loved seeing people develop decoders for them), the hassles needed for cross platform, data types whose definitions are variable across platforms, ugly IO/streams, relatively high need to rely on third party libraries to get basic and commonly needed functionality (and without the convenience of a dominant package manager / dependency management system / ecosystem that many other languages have), quality of tooling, relatively slow compilation time, consequential variations between compilers, and so on.

Now, I've avoided C/C++ as much as possible for a long time (but still used them directly in the past year) so some of the things I mentioned may have been improved, maybe even solved pretty well. And I won't say that everything is perfect in .NET / C# land. But when I see the terrible consequences of continuing to use C/C++ (security flaws alone is enough), the popularity of Go and Rust, and the pushback from C/C++ diehards, it leads me to believe that C/C++ likely continues to suck compared to the competition.

I don't know anything about Epic's verse language but I don't trust them. I used UE4 years ago and tried both blueprints and C++. I found both approaches to be sorely lacking in terms of productivity. Along with the large number of engine bugs I encountered and Epic's horrendous behavior, it was enough to lead me to ditch them and never return.

Tom wrote on Apr 24, 2023, 17:27:
Tim Sweeney is not a genius in his specialty either. His sad devotion to that ancient religion (C++) has helped hold the industry back more than you can imagine.

I am a diehard C++ advocate. I could not disagree with you more. Their new "verse" language is a mistake in my opinion. It should be C++, or something more akin to C++.

But I'd be interested in hearing why you hate C++ so much? I know a lot of people find it difficult, and don't like how much defined behavior can be written in it, and another camp just doesn't want anything but garbage collection. What are your thoughts?

This has all the weight and historical significance as restroom graffitti.

jacobvandy wrote on Apr 24, 2023, 15:37:
Sweeney must be grumpy because he was defeated in appeals court... all previous rulings in Epic v. Apple will stand except the part about Epic paying Apple's attorney fees (still TBD, but shifted from "nope" to "maybe").

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/21-16506/21-16506-2023-04-24.html

I doubt his complaint today was related to the mixed decision.
Tim tweeted

"Apple prevailed at the 9th Circuit Court. Though the court upheld the ruling that Apple's restraints have "a substantial anticompetitive effect that harms consumers", they found we didn't prove our Sherman Act case.
Fortunately, the court's positive decision rejecting Apple's anti-steering provisions frees iOS developers to send consumers to the web to do business with them directly there. We're working on next steps."

Tim Sweeney is not a genius in his specialty either. His sad devotion to that ancient religion (C++) has helped hold the industry back more than you can imagine.

Guys, spending $8 isn't merit. Most of the world can't even afford that, which anyone not blinded by wealth knows. And it doesn't verify anything.

Geniuses like Tim Sweeney can still be idiots outside their specialty. He got more wrong in his rant, too.

FloodAnxiety wrote on Apr 24, 2023, 15:32:
I don't know what the fuss is about. It sounds like he expressed himself quite clearly and accurately. Not sure what his success has to do with him being able to criticize Twitter's decisions.

This article just reads like someone who is crazy obsessed with trying to put down Tim Sweeney. After reading the article, I left with a more positive outlook about Tim Sweeney and less of a positive outlook on the author Luke Plunkett and the website kotaku.com which seems to think this is newsworthy. If I had to guess, Luke Plunkett is one of those Elon lovers that is trying to swoop in to defend their glorious Musk. I recommend that Mr Plunkett try a little harder, because his conclusion of "This man complaining about high school cliques and supposed “elites” is 52 years old and is worth almost $5 billion." is not the mic drop that he thinks it is.

Now, I'm just a man complaining about a man, who is complaining about another man, who complains about the largest social media network's silly policies; but maybe Mr. Plunkett should recognize that Mr. Sweeney is allowed to have an opinion, and that Mr. Sweeney's success does not mean he can't have an opinion on that topic, nor does it mean that he is a hypocrite for having on. If there is any hypocrisy going on, it is likely Mr. Plunkett's stance of "expressing his opinion that someone else's opinion should not have been expressed". Maybe Mr. Plunkett should look up with Ad Hominem means.

Why type a response when yours is already perfect? Crazy thing is, I find myself defending people like Musk and now Sweeney more and more often here. I really don't like Sweeney very much because of his hypocrisy, and I think Musk is an obnoxious loudmouth, but I feel that being fair is more important than slagging a guy every time his name is mentioned simply because I don't like him. In this case, Tim Sweeney isn't saying anything hypocritical; in fact I think he's right. He doesn't have to apologize for being rich and successful, and for the life of me I don't get why being such should prohibit him from talking about other rich and successful people if his point is valid.

jacobvandy wrote on Apr 24, 2023, 15:37:
Sweeney must be grumpy because he was defeated in appeals court... all previous rulings in Epic v. Apple will stand except the part about Epic paying Apple's attorney fees (still TBD, but shifted from "nope" to "maybe").

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/21-16506/21-16506-2023-04-24.html

Send that in to Blue for the news, good find.

Sweeney must be grumpy because he was defeated in appeals court... all previous rulings in Epic v. Apple will stand except the part about Epic paying Apple's attorney fees (still TBD, but shifted from "nope" to "maybe").

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/21-16506/21-16506-2023-04-24.html

FloodAnxiety wrote on Apr 24, 2023, 15:32:
This article just reads like someone who is crazy obsessed with trying to put down Tim Sweeney.

Exactly. Kotaku cancel culture at its best.

FloodAnxiety wrote on Apr 24, 2023, 15:32:
Now, I'm just a man complaining about a man, who is complaining about another man, who complains about the largest social media network's silly policies; but maybe Mr. Plunkett should recognize that Mr. Sweeney is allowed to have an opinion, and that Mr. Sweeney's success does not mean he can't have an opinion on that topic, nor does it mean that he is a hypocrite for having on[e]. If there is any hypocrisy going on, it is likely Mr. Plunkett's stance of "expressing his opinion that someone else's opinion should not have been expressed". Maybe Mr. Plunkett should look up with [sic] Ad Hominem means.

^ Poetry!

I don't know what the fuss is about. It sounds like he expressed himself quite clearly and accurately. Not sure what his success has to do with him being able to criticize Twitter's decisions.

This article just reads like someone who is crazy obsessed with trying to put down Tim Sweeney. After reading the article, I left with a more positive outlook about Tim Sweeney and less of a positive outlook on the author Luke Plunkett and the website kotaku.com which seems to think this is newsworthy. If I had to guess, Luke Plunkett is one of those Elon lovers that is trying to swoop in to defend their glorious Musk. I recommend that Mr Plunkett try a little harder, because his conclusion of "This man complaining about high school cliques and supposed “elites” is 52 years old and is worth almost $5 billion." is not the mic drop that he thinks it is.

Now, I'm just a man complaining about a man, who is complaining about another man, who complains about the largest social media network's silly policies; but maybe Mr. Plunkett should recognize that Mr. Sweeney is allowed to have an opinion, and that Mr. Sweeney's success does not mean he can't have an opinion on that topic, nor does it mean that he is a hypocrite for having on. If there is any hypocrisy going on, it is likely Mr. Plunkett's stance of "expressing his opinion that someone else's opinion should not have been expressed". Maybe Mr. Plunkett should look up with Ad Hominem means.

...

Tim Sweeney talking out of his ass? I am shocked. SHOCKED!

#nolivesmatter #theeldergodswilleatusall

It's funny to me how many seem to think the issue people have is either with it costing $8, or with it being open to anyone.

No one is complaining about either of those. They're complaining about the message it sends due to who has rushed to sign up. Much like there's nothing wrong with believing that all lives matter, but if you run around telling people that All Lives Matter, many people will avoid associating with you due to the type of people that do that.

It's basically the Twitter equivalent of a red MAGA hat.

How funny, Tim whining about mediocrity, when his own game launcher is just that.

How special!!