home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!ai-lab!life.ai.mit.edu!tmb
- From: tmb@arolla.idiap.ch (Thomas M. Breuel)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: Handling of operator . pro
- Message-ID: <TMB.92Aug31190650@arolla.idiap.ch>
- Date: 31 Aug 92 23:06:49 GMT
- References: <memo.565691@cix.compulink.co.uk> <9222523.7061@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
- Sender: news@ai.mit.edu
- Reply-To: tmb@idiap.ch
- Organization: IDIAP (Institut Dalle Molle d'Intelligence Artificielle
- Perceptive)
- Lines: 26
- In-reply-to: fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU's message of 12 Aug 92 13:32:47 GMT
-
- In article <9222523.7061@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus James HENDERSON) writes:
-
- Compilers become more expensive, which discourages beginners, so the
- language becomes less popular. (This in turn leads to less resources
- being spent on compilers and tools for the language). Compilation
- becomes slower. Compilers occupy more disk space and take longer to
- install. Also compilers become more error-prone; it is a lot easier to
- fix a bug in your work-around than to fix a bug in the compiler.
-
- [...]
-
- If the language becomes too complex, then "simply knowing the language"
- becomes a non-simple task. On the other hand if some feature has been
- coded using the facilities of a simple language, the maintainer can
- SEE how it works, by reading the code.
-
- The ideal is to have a language that is simple but powerful and extensible.
- This is the idea behind using standard library i/o functions rather than
- special builtins, overloading rathern than printf %-specifiers, etc.
-
- In all this discussion, please keep in mind that much of the
- complexity of C++ is due to its C heritage. It is quite possible to
- design and implement languages that are simpler, more powerful, and as
- efficient as C++ -- but they won't be backwards compatible with C.
-
- Thomas.
-