From the article Will C and C++ Survive?"...it appears that C++ is nearly extinct in IT organizations producing enterprise or stand-alone applications..."To what extent does this hold for financial applications?Reddy

Given that quant finance is all by itself a notable % of all in house development, the term "nearly extinct" is far from correct.I suppose I accept that in the long term it's highly possible that C overtakes C++ if the only thing left for these languages is embedded s/w.C is fine for code in washing machines, burglar alarms, cameras, MP3 players, network and graphics cards.Already we see cheap greetings cards with music and sound when you open them. I give a couple of years before they have some elementary code executing on them, maybe recording a message, or even interacting.In those environments, memory footprint intersects with relative simplicity.But I see embedded systems going the other way, towards great complexity, which just makes it more open to other languages. Recall that Java itself started off as a language for smart TVs.He says "Eventually, most C++ features that do not require runtime support will most likely become available in C."Agree with that mostly, since C is co-evolving with C++C, more than C++ has long had to fight to stop non-standard extensions being made for specific purposes.It is true that very little new "housekeeping" in corporates is written in C++. That's the domain of Perl, Python, Ruby Java and SQL these days, though of course there is the huge dying hulk of VB.But C++ has some home domains that mean it is not going to die.Almost all heavy duty s/w development like operating systems, shrink wrap applications, games, movies, etc happens in C++The movie people I know prefer Java, but the thought of doing serious graphics like the next Harry Potter film is frankly silly.I've seen a spreadsheet in Java. It was horrible.There is the dimwit Computer "Science" course at Kings College London, where they teach operating systems in Java. That shows a poverty of intellect such that we don't count it as a degree of any kind, much less one that implies an understanding of computers.But the collapse in the quality of applicants for CS courses in Europe and America mean that many places do not do C++ as an undergrad topic at all. This increasingly means that CS grads have no more deeper understanding of the technology they use than a BBC science correspondent.At least the BBC journo would have met someone who understands computers, most CS grads don't see "understanding" as a goal at all.

QuoteBut the collapse in the quality of applicants for CS courses in Europe and America mean that many places do not do C++ as an undergrad topic at all. This increasingly means that CS grads have no more deeper understanding of the technology they use than a BBC science correspondent.At least the BBC journo would have met someone who understands computers, most CS grads don't see "understanding" as a goal at all.'get them when they are young' ! But that is not happening anymore, so that CS graduates enter industry without the necessary wherewithall. It means that they are unable to tackle the real challenging problem because of lack of maths and old-fashioned CS skills. What's happening is that foreign nationals are employed who do have the skills, whish is fine of course. But home-grown skills are needed.So, I am in complete agreement with Dominic on this issue.

So how people are learning C++ these days ? Self-study ?

QuoteOriginally posted by: MCarreiraSo how people are learning C++ these days ? Self-study ?Personally, I do quite a bit of self-study in C++ and so on. But then there are courses and Distance Learning events as well.

I taught myself, there are enough books / internet tutorials about. Funnily enough my friends who studied CS never learnt C++ (and all dislike it). Whereas my friends that do engineering got taught it as part of their course.

QuoteOriginally posted by: phuebuFunnily enough my friends who studied CS never learnt C++ (and all dislike it). Whereas my friends that do engineering got taught it as part of their course.That's what I have seen as well. The reason is: Computer Scientist mindset is very different from the Engineer mindset. It's like a law of physics.

QuoteOriginally posted by: MCarreiraSo how people are learning C++ these days ? Self-study ?Teaching myself. It's not "that" hard.

QuoteOriginally posted by: TraderJoeQuoteOriginally posted by: MCarreiraSo how people are learning C++ these days ? Self-study ?Teaching myself. It's not "that" hard.Although from what I've seen it seems that in C++ it makes a lot of difference if you know what not to do ... and sometimes you'll need someone else to tell you that.

QuoteOriginally posted by: MCarreiraQuoteOriginally posted by: TraderJoeQuoteOriginally posted by: MCarreiraSo how people are learning C++ these days ? Self-study ?Teaching myself. It's not "that" hard.Although from what I've seen it seems that in C++ it makes a lot of difference if you know what not to do ... and sometimes you'll need someone else to tell you that.Ah!

QuoteAlthough from what I've seen it seems that in C++ it makes a lot of difference if you know what not to do ... and sometimes you'll need someone else to tell you that. It's the 20-80% rule again. Self-taught C++ programmers can miss out on some vital syntax.It's vital you learn what memory management.And ... C++ is not just about classes and inheritance, in fact templates are just, if not more important. And you can use C++ without classes.When that's done (3 years), how to design an application dominates. ExampleLong ago.. one guy lost 2 weeks project work deuggging, he had not created a copy constructor, 101