Not quite. Although you can compile C++ as part of an OSX or iOS project, there's no point - other than using someone else's library. The parts of projects that aren't Obj-C tend to be C.

Why?

You're dropping out of Obj-C for cross platform compatibility, because you're dealing with a low level Apple API, or because you want maximum speed for some part of the code. All these things are usually best served by C. If you're wanting objects at the expense of speed, then you wouldn't stray from Obj-C in the first place.

As we established in previous stories, you don't code in Objective-C at all. You claim experience you don't have.

In Obj-C:
NSArray *items = [string componentsSeperatedByString:@","];

Division is a single concept, whether it's ints or it's reals and complex numbers.
Bit shifting and stream i/o are completely different concepts.

You're not a geek then.

The fact that Apple made them an offer they didn't want to refuse hardly proves A123 are awful.

They might be. But this isn't evidence of that.

Android's tend to have removable batteries. iPhones don't.
Android's have this malware. iPhones don't.

No, it was still a moronic point.

By that moronic line of thought, the story's claim that OSM now supports routing is also wrong.

Great anecdote. Right here, right now, today, OSM believes my location is a country that's at the opposite side of the world from the one I actually am in.

None of the commercial services ever get this wrong for me these days. They all pinpoint me within a block.

That means OSM has fallen at the first hurdle. If it doesn't get the continent, let alone the country right, it won't recognise my locations when I type them in to the router.

Maybe I'll check back again in a few more years.

Sure other stuff needs to be attached. But this isn't an issue. Bone replacement is a routine everyday operation.

It's done in specific circumstances, such as games, where there's a lot of logic that is platform independent. But for most mobile apps other than games, it's more talked about than actually done. For exactly the reason the OP suggests.

I'm employed as a senior developer. I've been working in the field for about 25 years. The problem is that the job of software developer is that of an inventor with a massive assortment of parts to build from and methods to build with. Add to that the fact that clients don't really understand the problem they're asking the developer to solve and that the problem is usually outside of the developer's core knowledge areas. Ask a dozen experienced developers how they would solve a problem and you're likely to get a dozen different answers, and if you tried to implement each of them you'd find reasons that they're all bad in one way or another.

Instead of looking for a dev who isn't bad at what they do, look for one who is passionate about building software and not *very* bad at building it.

(*) Except maybe Donald Knuth. That dude knows his shit. But even he choses some bazaar tools to solve problems making it difficult to work with other devs.

I'm glad you did. Because you've just illustrated why you have no appreciation of the uselessness of GPLed software to most people. You are neither a software developer, nor do you make much use of mainstream application categories. You are in a tiny niche that lies on the brink of commercial software having to be extremely expensive or not being economically feasible because there are so few users.

As it happens my brother is also in that tiny niche, and has been for 3 decades. And I know from conversations I've had with him that it's a mixed bag. Sometimes the best (or only) software for the task is open source, sometimes it's commercial but free of charge from chip companies, and sometimes it's very expensive commercial stuff.

But as I say it's pretty irrelevant to mainstream software developers, let alone to the majority of application categories.