<div dir="ltr">sure thing, it is matter of taste and experience and whole lot of factors <div>i agree that compile times are abysmal (that's due C legacy which was major goal for C++ and of course hardware limitations back in 80's)</div><div><br></div><div>but for me quality of interfaces that you can achieve is stunning (again my view) </div><div><br></div><div>to add criticism, macros should be banished, and OOP is overused in C++, implicit conversions are not nice, visitor pattern is problem, etc.</div><div>discipline is the thing in c++</div><div><br></div><div>but as it has memory model defined, lifetime management and things like that i think it would be good fit for implementing erlang for IoT</div><div><br></div><div> <br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:53 PM, Oliver Korpilla <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Oliver.Korpilla@gmx.de" target="_blank">Oliver.Korpilla@gmx.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi.<br>
<br>
This is, of course, something that can easily devolve into a holy war where everyone clamors for their favorite programming language.<br>
<br>
But cannot resist... XD<br>
<br>
I never felt empowered by C++ templates. I find that code written heavily depending on templates to drastically decrease in readability (and hence maintainability) while the compile times of C++ are just plain horrible (btw a side effect of how templates were put into the language in the first place). It has been a major pain at my workplace when it comes to running continuous integration.<br>
<br>
I learned about a dozen languages well enough to do projects in them, and C++ will always be the ugly one that I want to get away from but which is without alternative in the minds of project managers.<br>
<br>
*ducks*<br>
<br>
Oliver<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Gesendet: Montag, 25. September 2017 um 23:38 Uhr<br>
Von: "Karlo Kuna" <<a href="mailto:kuna.prime@gmail.com">kuna.prime@gmail.com</a>><br>
An: "Erlang-Questions Questions" <<a href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@erlang.org</a>><br>
<span class="">Betreff: Re: [erlang-questions] Erlang VM in Rust<br>
<br>
</span><span class="">Just to add a voice in this discussion ,<br>
i would love to see c++ implementation of erlang, and it soul be possible due power of templates get much more <br>
safe and easily extendible code base IMHO. It would require lot of expertise and _discipline_ but i cold be fun project<br>
<br>
also I wold love to have erlang implementation for IoT, as erlang seems to be great fit for that<br>
for this one i am with Joe, we need something small portable (and written in c++ of course) <br>
<br>
<br>
</span>On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Richard A. O'Keefe <<a href="mailto:ok@cs.otago.ac.nz">ok@cs.otago.ac.nz</a>[mailto:<a href="mailto:ok@cs.otago.ac.nz">ok@<wbr>cs.otago.ac.nz</a>]> wrote:<br>
<span class=""><br>
On 25/09/17 10:41 PM, Attila Rajmund Nohl wrote:2017-09-23 9:28 GMT+02:00 Oliver Korpilla <<a href="mailto:Oliver.Korpilla@gmx.de">Oliver.Korpilla@gmx.de</a>[<wbr>mailto:<a href="mailto:Oliver.Korpilla@gmx.de">Oliver.Korpilla@gmx.de</a>]<wbr>>:<br>
[...]Having said that I see no immense security risk in writing code for a remote sensor in C. It avoids one of the prime security risks: human user interactions and all the buffer overrun problems and string processing stuff that is so hard to do safely that there are still books being written about.<br>
If it is connected to the internet (the first letter in IoT), then it<br>
at least needs to handle IPv4 - and it involves parsing of potentially<br>
untrusted data.<br>
The remote sensors I am interested in are *not* connected to the<br>
internet. They are connected via radio to each other and to base<br>
stations, and the base stations may then be connected to the<br>
internet (probably using an OS and IP stack written in C).<br>
<br>
There is a serious point here that *end* devices are likely to be<br>
as small as you can get away with. Instead of spending money on<br>
bigger/faster machines, it's rather more useful to have *more*<br>
machines that are just capable enough to do the job.<br>
<br>
Other people may be interested in other things.<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
erlang-questions mailing list<br>
</span><a href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@erlang.org</a>[<wbr>mailto:<a href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@<wbr>erlang.org</a>]<br>
<a href="http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions_______________________________________________" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://erlang.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/erlang-questions_____<wbr>______________________________<wbr>____________</a> erlang-questions mailing list <a href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@erlang.org</a> <a href="http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions[http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions]" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://erlang.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/erlang-questions[<wbr>http://erlang.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/erlang-questions]</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>