home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: herold.franken.de!jhd
- Date: 18 Mar 1996 22:54:00 +0100
- From: jhd@herold.franken.de (Joachim Durchholz)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.object,comp.software-eng
- Message-ID: <657x3zrk3RB@herold.franken.de>
- References: <1995Jul3.034108.4193@rcmcon.com>
- <RMARTIN.96Mar15094448@rcm.oma.com> <bksDoE2Fu.GBp@netcom.com>
- <653t-Df-3RB@herold.franken.de> <bksDoFwBA.Eut@netcom.com>
- Subject: Re: Beware of "C" Hackers -- A rebuttal to Bertrand Meyer
- X-Newsreader: CrossPoint v3.1
-
- bks@netcom.com wrote 18.03.96 on Re: Beware of "C" Hackers -- A rebuttal to Bertrand Meyer:
-
- > Typical OO enthusiast. After 10 years Eiffel is still *new*.
-
- Huh? How is OO enthusiasm related to Eiffel being new?
-
- Besides, what version of Eiffel do you mean - some experimental compiler
- that demonstrated some issues about proving program correctness, or a
- compiler that can be used for production programming?
-
- Considering the life cycle of new programming concepts, Eiffel is more in
- a position like Algol 60 - it is the first language that demonstrates the
- new principles in a convincing way. (C++ doesn't convince me. That is a
- language like PL/I - designed by committees made up of industrial
- representatives, with lots of mechanisms, but no straighforward
- solutions.)
- Algol 60 hasn't exactly come into widespread use, but C is one of its
- descendants (like the vast majority of modern programming languages).
- Eiffel may meet the same fate, being an unsuccesful progenitor of a
- successful language. But the language to replace Eiffel in the programming
- community hasn't been specified yet, and I doubt it can be done before
- more experience with OO has been collected.
-
- -Joachim
-
- --
- Im speaking for myself here.
- ## CrossPoint v3.1 ##
-