| |||||||||||||
A look at C++14, part 1A look at C++14, part 1Posted Mar 29, 2013 2:02 UTC (Fri) by geofft (subscriber, #59789)In reply to: A look at C++14, part 1 by ledow Parent article: A look at C++14, part 1
Rocket science is complicated, but plenty of non-rocket-scientists fly airplanes.
The question isn't how hard the language is to implement -- it's how hard the language is to use. This looks straightforward to use, in my eyes.
(Log in to post comments)
A look at C++14, part 1 Posted Mar 29, 2013 9:18 UTC (Fri) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
Rocket SCIENCE is easy. Rocket *technology* is hard.
Rocket science is a tube closed at one end, with a supply of two fuels which (spontaneously?) burn when mixed. THAT'S IT!
Rocket technology, on the other hand, is concerned with making sure you don't get too much fuel too quick (explosion) or too slow (rocket doesn't fly), and the controls to make it fly in the right direction, and launch safely etc etc etc.
Rocket SCIENCE is EASY!
Cheers,
A look at C++14, part 1 Posted Mar 29, 2013 10:29 UTC (Fri) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link] Don't even need two fuels; one can build a liquid-fuel rocket motor that runs by the catalytic decomposition of hydrogen peroxide or hydrazine.
|
|||||||||||||