

Parody of an interview with Bjarne Stroustrup, the creator of C++ - gcv
http://odgaard.org/jeod/funny/interview.html

======
tptacek
Please make this thing stop; this is the Hacker News equivalent of those joke
faxes that offices used to circulate in the '90s.

------
bdfh42
Parody, What Parody?

Most of us have held this to be a true confession

------
kailashbadu
For a moment I actually found myself believing the interview. I could relate
and identify with.

------
point
If you cannot learn C++, you are either plain old stupid or you don't belong
in programming. C++ is very easy, the syntax is picked up in a week, and you
can work without any libraries, you mostly just need to learn the API of the
host system. If you can program in Ruby, you are capable enough to program in
C++, and the only thing stopping you is just this 'myth' that C++ is hard.

~~~
andreyf
_C++ is very easy, the syntax is picked up in a week, and you can work without
any libraries, you mostly just need to learn the API of the host system._

You don't know C++.

~~~
point
What's the hard part of the syntax compared to a language like ruby?
Interfaces? Classes? Inheritance? Templates? Exceptions? Ruby has equivalent
interface elements, and there is not much of a difference in difficulty level
between learning the one or the other.

I learnt C++ in 2 weeks 7 years ago, and it was easy. The difficulty comes
with learning to use the libraries and host APIs, but that is exactly the same
for every other language I've learnt since then.

~~~
hairsupply
Things Ruby isn't concerned with that people typically have problems with in
C++:

\- No compiling or linking phase in Ruby. Linking problems can be hairy in
large systems.

\- Header file hell

\- The static keyword (there are four different contexts)

\- Difference between a pointer and reference

\- public, private, protected inheritance

\- Differences between dispatch (and underlying impl) of virtual and
nonvirtual methods

\- method hiding

\- diamond of death

\- visibility vs accessibility

\- casting idioms (static, dynamic, const, reinterpret)

\- ugly libraries (STL, ATL, MFC, COM) yeah, i said STL is ugly.

\- templates (Ruby doesn't need templates since everything is dynamic)

\- No language level string data type (our product has at least six
representations of strings here and there that need to be converted at the bit
level).

