«

On 22/08/2012 21:56, Robert Wessel wrote:

>
> *Objective C would have a similar high level of C compatibility as
> C++, for example, but I think you'd be hard pressed to consider that
> as sufficiently mainstream.
>

I'm not so sure. Objective-C is growing in popularity all the time. It
has the advantage that any valid C program is a valid Objective-C
program and can also use C++ classes directly via Objective-C++. Sounds
like a win / win situation to me.

On 23/08/2012 14:32, Robert Wessel wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 10:49:35 +0100, Chicken McNuggets
> <> wrote:
>
>> On 22/08/2012 21:56, Robert Wessel wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> *Objective C would have a similar high level of C compatibility as
>>> C++, for example, but I think you'd be hard pressed to consider that
>>> as sufficiently mainstream.
>>>
>>
>> I'm not so sure. Objective-C is growing in popularity all the time. It
>> has the advantage that any valid C program is a valid Objective-C
>> program and can also use C++ classes directly via Objective-C++. Sounds
>> like a win / win situation to me.
>
>
> Outside the Apple world, the use of Objective-C relative to C++
> appears to be miniscule, bordering on the non-existent.
>

According to the Tiobe language index for August 2012 it is the third
most popular language (ahead of C++).

http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/conte...pci/index.html

On Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:23:01 PM UTC+2, Vincenzo Mercuri wrote:
> Il 8/23/2012 3:49 PM, Chicken McNuggets ha scritto:
>
> > On 23/08/2012 14:32, Robert Wessel wrote:
>
> >> Outside the Apple world, the use of Objective-C relative to C++
> >> appears to be miniscule, bordering on the non-existent.
>
>
> > According to the Tiobe language index for August 2012 it is the third
> > most popular language (ahead of C++).
> >
> > http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/conte...pci/index.html
>
>
>
> That doesn't prove that Objective-C is as popular outside the Apple world.
>

Given this data, I'd say that the Apple-world is more popular than C++

Ciao!

Chicken McNuggets wrote:

> According to the Tiobe language index for August 2012 it is the third
> most popular language (ahead of C++).
>
> http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/conte...pci/index.html


That index is meaningless. For example, it tries to account the popularity
of a given programming language by counting the number of videos on youtube
that pop out on a given search.

http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/conte...definition.htm


Meanwhile, a search on sourceforge for C++ returns 1632 results[1], while a
search on Objective C returns 66[2].


Rui Maciel

[1] http://sourceforge.net/directory/language:c%2B%2B/
[2] http://sourceforge.net/directory/languagebjective-c/

wrote:

> Given this data, I'd say that the Apple-world is more popular than C++

It may be more popular in youtube and in a set of random blogs, but that is
meaningless and it isn't exactly what a programming language is for.


Rui Maciel

In article <k15pvn$fhj$>,
Rui Maciel <> wrote:
> wrote:
>
>> Given this data, I'd say that the Apple-world is more popular than C++
>
>It may be more popular in youtube and in a set of random blogs, but that is
>meaningless and it isn't exactly what a programming language is for.

I'm curious exactly how you would answer the question (below) if you were
being perfectly honest and not trying to impress anyone on Usenet.

Q: What exactly do we mean when we say that language A is more "popular"
than language B?

--
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
~ Epicurus

In article <k15q2u$dhh$>,
Kenny McCormack <> wrote:
....
>Q: What exactly do we mean when we say that language A is more "popular"
>than language B?

I suggest that the most common interpretation of this question is:

Q: What language should I study in school to maximize my chances of getting
a job?

--
Given Bush and his insanely expensive wars (*), that we will be paying for
for generations to come, the only possible response a sensible person need
ever give, when a GOPer/TeaBagger says anything about "deficits", is a
polite snicker.

(*) Obvious money transfers between the taxpayers and Bush's moneyed
interests. Someday, we'll actually figure out a way to have a war where the
money just gets moved around and nobody (on either side) gets injured or
killed. That will be an accomplishment of which we will be justly proud.

On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 10:43:21 +0100
Chicken McNuggets <> wrote:

> On 22/08/2012 21:20, Vincenzo Mercuri wrote:
> > On 22/08/2012 21:45, BartC wrote:
> >
> > [..]
> >>
> >> It's no surprise that there might be better languages for
> >> implementing compilers with than C. Especially with much faster
> >> hardware now that allows more productive languages to be used.
> >>
> >> But I wouldn't have chosen C++..
> >>
> >
> > Don't forget that GCC itself is a set of programs that need to run
> > "reasonably fast". It would take very long to compile the QT
> > libraries if GCC was implemented in any scripting language. C++
> > seems to offer the best compromise between abstractions and
> > performance.
> >
>
> I don't know. There are plenty of fast languages that are not C or
> C++. Haskell strikes me as an interesting language that is both "fast
> enough" and extremely expressive.

Haskell fast? Well, it provides C strings and such but language
is inherently *slow*.
Java is much faster than Haskell for example...



--
drwxr-xr-x 2 bmaxa bmaxa 4096 Aug 22 11:59 .

On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 10:49:35 +0100
Chicken McNuggets <> wrote:

> On 22/08/2012 21:56, Robert Wessel wrote:
>
> >
> > *Objective C would have a similar high level of C compatibility as
> > C++, for example, but I think you'd be hard pressed to consider that
> > as sufficiently mainstream.
> >
>
> I'm not so sure. Objective-C is growing in popularity all the time.
> It has the advantage that any valid C program is a valid Objective-C
> program and can also use C++ classes directly via Objective-C++.
> Sounds like a win / win situation to me.

What are advantages of Objective C over C++?


--
drwx------ 2 bmaxa bmaxa 4096 Aug 23 21:14 .

On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 14:49:38 +0100
Chicken McNuggets <> wrote:

> On 23/08/2012 14:32, Robert Wessel wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 10:49:35 +0100, Chicken McNuggets
> > <> wrote:
> >
> >> On 22/08/2012 21:56, Robert Wessel wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> *Objective C would have a similar high level of C compatibility as
> >>> C++, for example, but I think you'd be hard pressed to consider
> >>> that as sufficiently mainstream.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I'm not so sure. Objective-C is growing in popularity all the
> >> time. It has the advantage that any valid C program is a valid
> >> Objective-C program and can also use C++ classes directly via
> >> Objective-C++. Sounds like a win / win situation to me.
> >
> >
> > Outside the Apple world, the use of Objective-C relative to C++
> > appears to be miniscule, bordering on the non-existent.
> >
>
> According to the Tiobe language index for August 2012 it is the third
> most popular language (ahead of C++).
>
> http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/conte...pci/index.html

Hm. Besides OOlite I don;t know any other application that uses
Objective C on Linux (or for that matter Windows).


--
drwx------ 2 bmaxa bmaxa 4096 Aug 23 21:15 .