home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.daimi.aau.dk!pjunold
- From: pjunold@daimi.aau.dk (Peter Joachim Unold)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,rec.games.programmer,alt.msdos.programmer,comp.programming
- Subject: Re: Young programmers read me.
- Date: 18 Apr 1996 09:17:09 GMT
- Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University
- Message-ID: <4l51al$fb6@gjallar.daimi.aau.dk>
- References: <4icpp9$7hr@barad-dur.nas.com> <4imqe4$cj3@ping1.ping.be> <1996Mar23.224853.116513@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <4j52hn$ikb@news.ios.com> <Pine.OSF.3.91.960403112207.17337H-100000@bud.cc.swin.edu.au> <aidan-0404961557290001@meathook.intac.com> <pnoguchi-0404962135210001@pnoguchi.his.com> <4kv046$lg4@ionews.ionet.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: gallium.daimi.aau.dk
-
- Thus spake tconiam@ionet.net (Todd Coniam):
-
- [cut of someone's praise of c++]
- >--
- >While experience in the commercial world has proven time and time again that
- >programmers are not capable of capturing most bugs in the program when using
- >C/C++ until well into the development. C/C++ is inherently one of the most
- >error prone languages around. Dangling pointers and memory leaks are all
- >slip into code much too easy, and are horrible to try and track down. The
- >folks at Purity Software(C) are making money hand over fist selling products
- >that help with just these problems. Perhaps you've heard of 'Purify'?
-
- Sure we have. While dangling pointers can be a hell to find, I never understood
- why memory leaks should be that horrible. Especially not in a language like
- C++ where resource allocating/freeing can be dealt with in such a nice way.
- (see Stroustrup's 'the c++ programming language').
- Also providing your own global new/delete operators, which takes extra debug
- arguments is quite easy.
-
- >If C++ is soo great why do most major developments severly limit the features
- >that they allow used in the project. Templates and multiple inheritance
-
- Huh? What major C++ projects doesn't use templates? I can understand why
- anyone wouldn't use the most advanced new features, but banning good old
- ARM defined templates is just stupidity. As for MI, it depends entirely
- on your design, wether you use it or not.
-
- >(C++'s _great_ features) are usually the first to go. Wouldn't you rather
- >have the compiler tell you that your code is crap before you try and run it?
-
- Sorry? C++ is a static checked language.
-
- >Try Ada 95, all the benefits of easy to understand syntax (you can read
- >tommorow or next year!) with all the great object orientated features you want
- >along with full multi-tasking in the language!
- >Check out the web sites below and see for yourself. You won't be sorry.
-
- OK thanks. We'll all check it. But you'd be a better advocate of Ada 95 if you
- provided us with some arguments of why Ada 95 is better, instead of stupid
- c++ flames.
-
- I've substituted your Ada 95 URL with an URL to the latest public ansi c++ draft.
- There you can learn some more about the language before you flame the next time.
-
- best regards
- peter unold - pjunold@daimi.aau.dk
-
- c++ draft: http://www.cygnus.com/misc/wp/draft/
-