programming languages

Rank

Mathematica vs C++

  1. This language excels at symbolic manipulation

    94% 6%
  2. This is a high level language

    88% 12%
  3. This language is built on a small core of orthogonal features

    87% 13%
  4. This language matches it's problem domain particularly well.

    87% 13%
  5. This language has a niche outside of which I would not use it

    86% 14%
  6. This language is easier to use for it's problem domain by removing unneeded expressiveness (such as not being Turing complete).

    84% 16%
  7. I still discover new features of this language on a fairly regular basis

    83% 17%
  8. I often write things in this language with the intent of rewriting them in something else later

    83% 17%
  9. This language has a niche in which it is great

    81% 19%
  10. The semantics of this language are much different than other languages I know.

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

    80% 20%
  12. This language is minimal

    78% 22%
  13. I enjoy playing with this language but would never use it for "real code"

    78% 22%
  14. This language is likely to be a passing fad

    76% 24%
  15. I am reluctant to admit to knowing this language

    72% 28%
  16. This language has a very coherent design

    71% 29%
  17. This language is good for numeric computing

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

    68% 32%
  19. Code written in this language tends to be terse

    66% 34%
  20. Code written in this language will usually run in all the major implementations if it runs in one of them.

    66% 34%
  21. This language encourages writing code that is easy to maintain.

    65% 35%
  22. I would use this language as a scripting language embedded inside a larger application

    64% 36%
  23. This language is best for very small projects

    64% 36%
  24. The resources for learning this language are of high quality

    63% 37%
  25. This language has unusual features that I often miss when using other languages

    63% 37%
  26. I often feel like I am not smart enough to write this language

    63% 37%
  27. This language is good for scientific computing

    62% 38%
  28. This language has a very rigid idea of how things should be done

    61% 39%
  29. I find this language easy to prototype in

    60% 40%
  30. If this language didn't exist, I would have trouble finding a satisfactory replacement

    60% 40%
  31. This language has an annoying syntax

    58% 42%
  32. I use this language out of choice

    57% 43%
  33. This language would be good for teaching children to write software

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

    55% 45%
  35. This language is well documented

    55% 45%
  36. If my code in this language successfully compiles, there is a good chance my code is correct.

    55% 45%
  37. I am sometimes embarrassed to admit to my peers that I know this language

    53% 47%
  38. I enjoy using this language

    53% 47%
  39. This language has well-organized libraries with consistent, carefully thought-out interfaces

    52% 48%
  40. I would use this language for casual scripting

    52% 48%
  41. Code written in this language is very readable

    50% 50%
  42. This language has a wide variety of agreed-upon conventions, which are generally adhered to reasonably well, and which increase my productivity

    50% 50%
  43. I usually use this language on solo projects

    50% 50%
  44. This language excels at text processing

    50% 50%
  45. This language has a very dogmatic community

    46% 54%
  46. This language is well suited for an agile development approach using short iterations.

    46% 54%
  47. It's unusual for me to discover unfamiliar features

    46% 54%
  48. I find code written in this language very elegant

    44% 56%
  49. Libraries in this language tend to be well documented.

    44% 56%
  50. Learning this language improved my ability as a programmer

    43% 57%
  51. This language has a good library distribution mechanism.

    42% 58%
  52. Code written in this language tends to be very reliable

    42% 58%
  53. I would like to write more of this language than I currently do

    41% 59%
  54. I often get angry when writing code in this language

    41% 59%
  55. This language is frequently used for applications it isn't suitable for

    40% 60%
  56. This language has a high quality implementation

    40% 60%
  57. I would use this language for a web project

    40% 60%
  58. It is easy to debug programs written in this language when it goes wrong

    38% 62%
  59. This language has a good community

    38% 62%
  60. I learned this language early in my career as a programmer

    37% 63%
  61. I would recommend most programmers learn this language, regardless of whether they have a specific need for it

    36% 64%
  62. This language excels at concurrency

    36% 64%
  63. I rarely have difficulty abstracting patterns I find in my code

    36% 64%
  64. The thought that I may still be using this language in twenty years time fills me with dread

    33% 67%
  65. This language is likely to have a strong influence on future languages

    31% 69%
  66. I use a lot of code written in this language which I really don't want to have to make changes to

    31% 69%
  67. It is too easy to write code in this language that looks like it does one thing but actually does something else

    31% 69%
  68. I regularly use this language

    30% 70%
  69. Learning this language significantly changed how I use other languages.

    30% 70%
  70. Programs written in this language tend to play well with others

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

    27% 73%
  72. This language is very flexible

    27% 73%
  73. I would use this language for mobile applications

    25% 75%
  74. This language is good for distributed computing

    25% 75%
  75. This language has many features which feel "tacked on"

    25% 75%
  76. This language is expressive

    25% 75%
  77. Developers who primarily use this language often burn out after a few years

    25% 75%
  78. I know this language well

    24% 76%
    Mathematica 185 out of 245 picked C++ over Mathematica C++
  79. This language encourages writing reusable code.

    23% 77%
  80. This language is large

    23% 77%
  81. This language is unusually bad for beginners

    23% 77%
  82. I can imagine this will be a popular language in twenty years time

    23% 77%
  83. Programs written in this language will usually work in future versions of the language

    23% 77%
  84. I find it easy to write efficient code in this language

    22% 78%
  85. This language allows me to write programs where I know exactly what they are doing under the hood

    21% 79%
  86. Code written in this language tends to be verbose

    19% 81%
  87. This language has a strong static type system

    18% 82%
  88. Programs written in this language tend to be efficient

    18% 82%
  89. There are many good commercial tools for this language

    17% 83%
  90. I would list this language on my resume

    17% 83%
  91. I usually use this language on projects with many other members

    15% 85%
  92. I would use this language for a desktop GUI project

    15% 85%
  93. When I run into problems my colleagues can provide me with immediate help with this language

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

    14% 86%
  95. This language is likely to be around for a very long time

    14% 86%
  96. There is a lot of accidental complexity when writing code in this language

    13% 87%
  97. This language is suitable for real-time applications

    11% 89%
  98. I would use this language for writing server programs

    9% 91%
  99. Writing code in this language is a lot of work

    9% 91%
  100. This is a mainstream language

    9% 91%
  101. I would use this language for writing programs for an embedded hardware platform

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

    7% 93%
  103. There are many good tools for this language

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

    6% 94%
  105. I use many applications written in this language

    5% 95%
  106. This language is best for very large projects

    100%
  107. There is a wide variety of open source code written in this language

    100%
  108. This is a low level language

    100%
  109. Third-party libraries are readily available, well-documented, and of high quality

    100%
  110. This language makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot

    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.