[snet0]

If a "C+++" was created that was so efficient that it would allow teams to be smaller and achieve the same work faster, would that be anti-worker?

If an IDE had powerful, effective hotkeys and shortcuts and refactoring tools that allowed devs to be faster and more efficient, would that be anti-worker?

[port11]

Was C+++ built by extensively mining other people's work, possibly creating an economic bubble, putting thousands out of work, creating spikes in energy demand, raising the price of electronic components and inflating the price of downstream products, abusing people's privacy,… hmm. Was it?

[nkmnz]

Yes (especially drawing from the invention of the numbers 0 and 1), yes (i.e. dotcom bubble), yes (probably people who were writing COBOL up until then), yes (please shut down all your devices), yes, yes.

[lpcvoid]

What part of c++ is inefficient? I can write that pretty quickly without having some cloud service hallucinate stuff.

And no, a faster way to write or refactor code is not anti-worker. Corporations gobbling up tax payer money to build power hungry datacenters so billionaires can replace workers is.

[snet0]

I never said C++ was inefficient, you don't have to prove anything. It's a hypothetical, try use your imagination.

> Corporations gobbling up tax payer money to build power hungry datacenters so billionaires can replace workers is.

Which part of this is important? If there was no taxpayer funding, would it be okay? If it was low power-consumption, would it be okay?

I just want to understand what the precise issue is.