Object Oriented Programming really an Advantage

[6502]

C is good, but Java doesn't need to be recompiled by the distributor, is even more portable, and will work between OSes easily, and our modern computers are powerful enough that the performance hit from the JVM doesn't matter as much as it used to.

You "recompile" once and then the program runs 10x or 100x faster than Java.

 

[kpedersen]

You "recompile" once and then the program runs 10x or 100x faster than Java.

Indeed. And no risk of a user coming back to you citing an error from "${INCOMPATIBLE_JRE}"

Backwards / forwards compatibility is a little bit of a minefield with the large Java VM's that ultimately run the bytecode. I guess it all starts here.

(What many tend to do is stick to LTS versions of the JRE and recompile everything every ~5 years)

 

[Zare]

The problem with OO isn't OO but how even not so average programmers treat it.

I've seen an open source 3D engine that used C++ OO hierarchy and patterns for its internal model. When you have to look up a float through the shitstorm of class hierarchy performance goes out of the window. The same engine had a major internal rewrite for next version, where this was simply dropped in favour of primitive objects such as pointer arrays and C style structs.

C++ still has some syntatic advantage over OO style C mainly the coupling of 'methods' inside a struct and 'this' keyword.
If such thing was in C it would shorthand a lot of code.

Besides OO is just one part of classic C++ which is not that friendly, operator overloads and RAII can be huge pitfalls too. The prologue and epilogue of some scope can drastically increase based on perhaps invisible constructor/destructor of some class. You can make class int with + operator overload that does "rm -rf ~" in the impl. 2+2 = files gone.

The concept of "Embedded C++" largely comes down to throwing away features that have expensive or complicated consequences from C++ and it is actually a good thing for desktop programming too.

 

[Greg_M]

C++20 Modules now have visibility vs reachability issues, causing significant challenges/complexities, for developers and especially for make/build tools.

C++ templates are either recompiled wherever used of if instantiated to provide an API, then C++ yield the same code duplication that C would, only at least in C, one has control over using CPU techniques to share common code for void*, various integer sizes, simple struct small structs, and perhaps even floats in some cases.

C++ may be like playing tennis with a baseball bat. Yes, you can hit a winner shot but with significant tool complexity and caution required, whereas with C and a bit of lower-level understanding, you can play with finesse and complete control. The knowledge required to control the plethora of knobs with C++ is probably significantly more at this point than the bit of CPU, memory, and hardware knowledge required to code in C and with memory safety. Not to mention compile performance for C is much better! Plus C23 and C2Y provide excellent features. C++ also does have some useful features, e.g. C++20 concepts, but again, the list of scenarios/syntax to avoid in C++ is long indeed.

Overall, OOP as a paradigm can be fine, but as a syntax it must be logically consistent and simply a different but helpful presentation of functional programming. Some OOP languages are better at that than others. Ultimately, functions are the core conceptual foundation, and I view OOP as a presentation layer that can simplify use of datasets with functions and reduce boilerplate.

 

[Greg_M]

The concept of "Embedded C++" largely comes down to throwing away features that have expensive or complicated consequences from C++ and it is actually a good thing for desktop programming too.

Yes, basically anything that results in the use of a vtable (e.g. inheritance), is generally best avoided.