Statistics about C++

Cholo Lennon

unread,

Feb 23, 2016, 10:01:19 AM2/23/16

to

What's your opinion about these statistics of C++?

http://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2015/07/infographics-cpp-facts-before-clion/

Some of them seem weird to me (like gcc usage on Windows)

Regards

--
Cholo Lennon
Bs.As.
ARG

Jerry Stuckle

unread,

Feb 23, 2016, 11:19:26 AM2/23/16

to

On 2/23/2016 10:01 AM, Cholo Lennon wrote:
> What's your opinion about these statistics of C++?
>
> http://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2015/07/infographics-cpp-facts-before-clion/
>
>
> Some of them seem weird to me (like gcc usage on Windows)
>
>
> Regards
>

With no information on how the "research" was done, the results of any
survey is questionable.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstu...@attglobal.net
==================

Cholo Lennon

unread,

Feb 23, 2016, 11:52:51 AM2/23/16

to

On 02/23/2016 01:19 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 2/23/2016 10:01 AM, Cholo Lennon wrote:
>> What's your opinion about these statistics of C++?
>>
>> http://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2015/07/infographics-cpp-facts-before-clion/
>>
>>
>> Some of them seem weird to me (like gcc usage on Windows)
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>
> With no information on how the "research" was done, the results of any
> survey is questionable.
>

Yeah, you're right, they didn't say that; and when someone asked about
data inconsistencies, the author said the following:

"The point is that various data has come from various data sources, that
can be influenced by many factors. When we got some data on the same
topic from different sources, we were trying to get some average"

It would be nice to know the data sources.

The positive side is that JetBrains has developed its CLion product
using the mentioned research (at least that's what they say)

Jorgen Grahn

unread,

Feb 25, 2016, 7:22:28 PM2/25/16

to

On Tue, 2016-02-23, Cholo Lennon wrote:
> On 02/23/2016 01:19 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> On 2/23/2016 10:01 AM, Cholo Lennon wrote:
>>> What's your opinion about these statistics of C++?
>>>
>>> http://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2015/07/infographics-cpp-facts-before-clion/
>>>
>>> Some of them seem weird to me (like gcc usage on Windows)

>> With no information on how the "research" was done, the results of any
>> survey is questionable.
>>
>
> Yeah, you're right, they didn't say that; and when someone asked about
> data inconsistencies, the author said the following:
>
> "The point is that various data has come from various data sources, that
> can be influenced by many factors. When we got some data on the same
> topic from different sources, we were trying to get some average"
>
> It would be nice to know the data sources.

They list eight of them. The "text" is really a PNG image, so I
cannot easily quote it.

It's nice that they list them, but I still wouldn't make any decisions
based on the results. All I know is I have no idea whatsoever what a
typical C++ developer looks like ...

> The positive side is that JetBrains has developed its CLion product
> using the mentioned research (at least that's what they say)

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

Christopher Pisz

unread,

Feb 25, 2016, 7:24:09 PM2/25/16

to

On 2/25/2016 6:22 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-02-23, Cholo Lennon wrote:
>> On 02/23/2016 01:19 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> On 2/23/2016 10:01 AM, Cholo Lennon wrote:

> SNIP

> All I know is I have no idea whatsoever what a
> typical C++ developer looks like ...

> SNIP
> /Jorgen
>

I hear neck-beards are fairly common.

--
I have chosen to troll filter/ignore all subthreads containing the
words: "Rick C. Hodgins", "Flibble", and "Islam"
So, I won't be able to see or respond to any such messages
---

Jerry Stuckle

unread,

Feb 25, 2016, 7:52:41 PM2/25/16

to

They list data sources. They say nothing about how the research was
done. Nor do they discuss how the research was aggregated.

Completely different topics.

Cholo Lennon

unread,

Feb 29, 2016, 7:55:19 AM2/29/16

to

My mistake, I wanted to say was what your are saying, how the research
was done (clearly the sources are listed, but without any additional
data. There is no link between the assertions and reddit or
stackoverflow for example)

Jerry Stuckle

unread,

Feb 29, 2016, 9:32:22 AM2/29/16

to

Sorry, I misunderstood you.

One of the things that many miss is good science (and surveys are a
branch of statistics, which a science) requires repeatability - that is,
an experiment must be repeatable. To do that, there has to be enough
detail to recreate the experiment.

In surveys, this includes selection of the audience, wording of the
questions and aggregating the results. Any of them can skew the results
considerably.

And the sorry part is, here in the United States, politics is very often
based on questionable "surveys" - by politicians, media, lobbyists,
non-profits with a political agenda... the list goes on and on.

I guess it's why I'm so negative towards "surveys" like this. I've seen
way too many purposely biased to get the desired answer.