Andy Little wrote:
C++'s main problem is that it doesnt have enough standard libraries to compete with (say) Java. Two obvious ones still not on the horizon are Unicode and GUI. ( I am going to try to do something about the GUI, though there must be much greater GUI experts than me that could do a better job). A major reason given by the committee AFAICS (in GUI case) was that the committee doesnt have enough time to deal with it.
Actually I believe the issue is that nobody has proposed a GUI library -- Bjarne has written many times about the desire to see a GUI library. But, its not really a surprise when you consider the huge amount of effort needed to do the design and development of such a proposal -- just to give it away. From the academic side, there isn't much incentive to try and create a C++ GUI library. Honestly, I like to look at this the other way around. C++ is the only language that has multiple cross-platform GUI libraries -- it's bad for training and consistency, but you're not confined to what a single commercial entity provides.
Yet there seems to be adequate time to discuss the addition of more complexities to the language itself. A great language missing some essential standard libraries. Will that be C++ epitaph?
Personally, I'm worried that C++ has had a major slip due to the lack of libraries. But I have to say that there's no way C++ library development can ever compete directly against commercial interests with serious monetary interest in language development (Sun/IBM/Oracle --> Java, Microsoft-->C#). These interests can and do spend millions to advance their platforms. Since C++ is an open standard it can't be owned and hence it just isn't as attractive to these interests with agendas. And you can't blame developers -- they need to get their projects done, not write infrastructure libraries... Jeff