programming languages

Rank

Mathematica vs C++

  1. This language excels at symbolic manipulation

    96% 4%
  2. This language matches it's problem domain particularly well.

    92% 8%
  3. This is a high level language

    89% 11%
  4. This language has a niche outside of which I would not use it

    89% 11%
  5. The semantics of this language are much different than other languages I know.

    86% 14%
  6. This language is likely to be a passing fad

    80% 20%
  7. This language has a very coherent design

    80% 20%
  8. It is easy to tell at a glance what code in this language does

    75% 25%
  9. This language is easier to use for it's problem domain by removing unneeded expressiveness (such as not being Turing complete).

    74% 26%
  10. I still discover new features of this language on a fairly regular basis

    73% 27%
  11. I often write things in this language with the intent of rewriting them in something else later

    72% 28%
  12. This language has a niche in which it is great

    72% 28%
  13. Code written in this language tends to be terse

    72% 28%
  14. This language is good for numeric computing

    70% 30%
  15. I enjoy playing with this language but would never use it for "real code"

    69% 31%
  16. This language is good for beginners

    68% 32%
  17. This language is best for very small projects

    68% 32%
  18. Code written in this language will usually run in all the major implementations if it runs in one of them.

    68% 32%
  19. This language would be good for teaching children to write software

    67% 33%
  20. This language is built on a small core of orthogonal features

    66% 34%
  21. This language has unusual features that I often miss when using other languages

    66% 34%
  22. This language is well documented

    65% 35%
  23. I find this language easy to prototype in

    65% 35%
  24. Code written in this language is very readable

    64% 36%
  25. This language excels at text processing

    64% 36%
  26. This language is good for scientific computing

    63% 37%
  27. This language is expressive

    63% 37%
  28. I would use this language for casual scripting

    62% 38%
  29. I would use this language as a scripting language embedded inside a larger application

    62% 38%
  30. I often feel like I am not smart enough to write this language

    62% 38%
  31. If this language didn't exist, I would have trouble finding a satisfactory replacement

    61% 39%
  32. I am sometimes embarrassed to admit to my peers that I know this language

    61% 39%
  33. Code written in this language tends to be very reliable

    61% 39%
  34. If my code in this language successfully compiles, there is a good chance my code is correct.

    61% 39%
  35. I enjoy using this language

    60% 40%
  36. This language is well suited for an agile development approach using short iterations.

    60% 40%
  37. I am reluctant to admit to knowing this language

    60% 40%
  38. I use this language out of choice

    58% 42%
  39. The resources for learning this language are of high quality

    57% 43%
  40. This language encourages writing code that is easy to maintain.

    57% 43%
  41. When I write code in this language I can be very sure it is correct

    55% 45%
  42. This language has well-organized libraries with consistent, carefully thought-out interfaces

    55% 45%
  43. I usually use this language on solo projects

    54% 46%
  44. This language is minimal

    53% 47%
  45. This language has an annoying syntax

    53% 47%
  46. I find code written in this language very elegant

    52% 48%
  47. It is easy to debug programs written in this language when it goes wrong

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 11 out of 22 each for C++ and Mathematica C++
  48. This language has a very dogmatic community

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 12 out of 24 each for C++ and Mathematica C++
  49. This language has a very rigid idea of how things should be done

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 14 out of 28 each for C++ and Mathematica C++
  50. Libraries in this language tend to be well documented.

    48% 52%
  51. It's unusual for me to discover unfamiliar features

    47% 53%
  52. I rarely have difficulty abstracting patterns I find in my code

    47% 53%
  53. I learned this language early in my career as a programmer

    46% 54%
  54. I would like to write more of this language than I currently do

    46% 54%
  55. I would recommend most programmers learn this language, regardless of whether they have a specific need for it

    44% 56%
  56. This language has a good library distribution mechanism.

    44% 56%
  57. This language has a wide variety of agreed-upon conventions, which are generally adhered to reasonably well, and which increase my productivity

    43% 57%
  58. Learning this language improved my ability as a programmer

    41% 59%
  59. This language excels at concurrency

    40% 60%
  60. This language is large

    40% 60%
  61. I regularly use this language

    40% 60%
  62. I often get angry when writing code in this language

    38% 62%
  63. This language is likely to have a strong influence on future languages

    38% 62%
  64. This language is good for distributed computing

    38% 62%
  65. This language has a high quality implementation

    37% 63%
  66. This language is frequently used for applications it isn't suitable for

    37% 63%
  67. This language encourages writing reusable code.

    36% 64%
  68. This language has a good community

    36% 64%
  69. I find it easy to write efficient code in this language

    35% 65%
  70. The thought that I may still be using this language in twenty years time fills me with dread

    34% 66%
  71. I use a lot of code written in this language which I really don't want to have to make changes to

    34% 66%
  72. This language has many features which feel "tacked on"

    33% 67%
  73. Learning this language significantly changed how I use other languages.

    32% 68%
  74. This language is very flexible

    31% 69%
  75. I would use this language for a web project

    31% 69%
  76. I can imagine this will be a popular language in twenty years time

    30% 70%
  77. I can imagine using this language in my day job

    30% 70%
  78. It is too easy to write code in this language that looks like it does one thing but actually does something else

    29% 71%
  79. Programs written in this language will usually work in future versions of the language

    29% 71%
  80. This language is unusually bad for beginners

    29% 71%
  81. Developers who primarily use this language often burn out after a few years

    29% 71%
  82. I usually use this language on projects with many other members

    29% 71%
  83. Programs written in this language tend to play well with others

    27% 73%
  84. I know this language well

    26% 74%
    Mathematica 304 out of 415 picked C++ over Mathematica C++
  85. I would list this language on my resume

    22% 78%
  86. Programs written in this language tend to be efficient

    22% 78%
  87. I would use this language for a desktop GUI project

    21% 79%
  88. This language is likely to be around for a very long time

    21% 79%
  89. Writing code in this language is a lot of work

    20% 80%
  90. There are many good commercial tools for this language

    20% 80%
  91. Code written in this language tends to be verbose

    19% 81%
  92. This language allows me to write programs where I know exactly what they are doing under the hood

    17% 83%
  93. I would use this language for mobile applications

    15% 85%
  94. This language has a strong static type system

    14% 86%
  95. I know many other people who use this language

    13% 87%
  96. There are many good tools for this language

    12% 88%
  97. Third-party libraries are readily available, well-documented, and of high quality

    11% 89%
  98. This language is best for very large projects

    11% 89%
  99. I use many applications written in this language

    10% 90%
  100. I would use this language for writing server programs

    9% 91%
  101. When I run into problems my colleagues can provide me with immediate help with this language

    9% 91%
  102. I would use this language to write a command-line app

    8% 92%
  103. There is a lot of accidental complexity when writing code in this language

    7% 93%
  104. There are many good open-source tools for this language

    7% 93%
  105. This language is suitable for real-time applications

    6% 94%
  106. This is a mainstream language

    5% 95%
  107. This language makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot

    4% 96%
  108. I would use this language for writing programs for an embedded hardware platform

    4% 96%
  109. There is a wide variety of open source code written in this language

    100%
  110. This is a low level language

    100%

What's going on here?

The absolute rankings are interesting for large scale comparisons but when you want to know about two specific languages it's much more informative to look at how the two fare when they go directly head to head.

Here are all the statements which we've got enough comparisons between Mathematica and C++ to be meaningful and which of the two our users picked.

The order in which we're presenting them is a little arbitrary (sorry), but we've tried to put the things which they're both good at first so as to give you the most interesting picture of it.