Gl_Terminator

Even if you think it or not programming languages are evolving and the last invention wasnt OO, it was Aspect Oriented Programming, again take a look at python.

Ugh, AOP should never be quoted as evolution. It's the inbred child of kissing cousins.

The only reason C++ is  not death is because is the best shot when programming at low level.

The question you are asking is - when will we lose access to hardware.

Imagine the day when you can no longer access hardware. Where you are provided an API by a vendor. Want to display an image, there is PlayVP8. Want H264? Sorry, not supported. Want to write custom fractal codec that has lossless compression ratio 100 times better than today's videos? Sorry, not supported. Want to play a video you recorded in Sony camera? Sorry, we only support Samsung.

Microsoft Phones are first example of this. Windows 8 will be the next. Which is ok, since you weren't planning on having a job in programming till retirement, were you? Because once things are standardized, the work can be performed by standardized workers which are being trained by million. Want to develop something better? Sorry, there is no hardware, and we control the platform. But feel free to license our stack and we might allow you to offer your new revolutionary codec as soon as you transfer all the patents to us and pay licensing fees.

Want to write new language? Sorry, we offer C# and VB. (remember Flash on Apple?). Remember how it cannot be implemented even if one wanted to?

This is the question you are asking.

But again take a look at cells for example Motorola cells java the JVM  implemented on HW and you build all the applications on it.

Oh, you want to use Java chipset? Sure, just pay $2 for each application you distribute to Oracle for licensing fees. People probably think this is a joke.


Trust me, you don't want C++ to die. And by consequence C, Go, D, assembly, ...

Of course the day when you loose access to hardware will come, but that is the day when informatics will face more serious problems than now, when a computer will manage complex things that humans do, WHO WILL CARE for a lots of stuff you care now. For the other side take an example of shader languages, they are high level languages and they run on video cards faster that any c/c++ application does. You need to understand that is natural evolution. For example you are forced to write languages and OS in Intel or AMD architecture and you don't complain about that. If you think you can make an improve you cant do anything.

This mindset really needs to die in a fire, twice.  Not rolling your own doesn't make you a shitty programmer, nor does creating your own make you a better programmer.

That said, I would hire that average programmer in a heartbeat over that annoying bastard that doesn't get anything done because "real programmers write all their own code".  I was just jesting when I made my comment, but your response is staggering in its wrongness, although the idea behind it is sadly all too prevelant.  Writing your own engine can be a great learning experience, hell, ive done it myself for kicks.  The idea though that if you don't makes you an average programmer is horrifically daft.

How the hell game programming got laced with so much false machismo staggers my mind.

I didn't mean to offense you, I am telling you this because i am a software engineer and engineers use what is already done. What makes you an average programmer is the lack of motivation to investigate and to learn what is underneath your code. I,ve seen a complete development team for example to use OGRE engine and didn't know how to correctly use texture coordinates. That,s what i mean by the way i have also made a 3D engine myself and I copied a LOT of code.

Here is a link for a 2D delaunay triangulation example in C#  http://vasilydev.blogspot.com/2011/08/delaunay-triangulation-example-in-c.html