Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.object
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!news.maz.net!news.ppp.de!news.Hanse.DE!wavehh.hanse.de!cracauer
From: cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de (Martin Cracauer)
Subject: Re: C++ Productivity
Message-ID: <1995Feb13.114847.22991@wavehh.hanse.de>
Organization: The Internet
References: <1995Jan23.193745.7044@boole.com> <jim.fleming.84.00133AB6@bytes.com> <1995Jan25.201226.28856@rcmcon.com> <jim.fleming.75.0003AF13@bytes.com> <3gls1u$p2l@osfa.aber.ac.uk> <1995Feb1.184049.16332@rcmcon.com> <D3E33s.DCp@da_vinci.ecte.uswc.uswest  <D3IAw9.6FH@syacus.acus.oz.au> <1995Feb6.184830.18048@rcmcon.com> <D3M3B7.L09@syacus.acus.oz.au> <3hgs2f$8i6@news.parc.xerox.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 95 11:48:47 GMT
Lines: 39
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:112496 comp.lang.smalltalk:20784 comp.object:26650

boehm@parc.xerox.com (Hans Boehm) writes:

>ian@syacus.acus.oz.au (Ian Joyner) writes:

>>I think there are two directions from which C++ is resisted:

>>1) Those who don't want to move from C (and who probably resisted
>>moving from assembler). I certainly do not agree with the unfounded
>>attacks on C++ that come from this direction, and I sympathise with
>>people like Robert and Bjarne who have had the frustration of trying
>>to promote something that is better. The people in this group are
>>often very vocal in their resistance to new things.
>>...

>I don't think this is a fair characterization.  At least at this
>point, C++ has some clear disadvantages with respect to C (as well
>as advantages):

>1. The state of compilers (which affects code portability).
>2. The lack of a language standard.
>3. Several things seem much harder in current C++ due to the fact that,
>at least in the ARM, the compiler is given broad license to insert calls
>to constructors and destructors:
>- Compiler independent program analysis tools.
>- Informal reasoning about, for example, program performance.
>4. Language complexity. (Why does exactly one compiler complain
>that I used operator delete before it was declared "inline" when
>there is no "delete" invocation in the file?. And it wasn't a compiler bug.) 

I'd like to add

5. Code of different compilers cannot be linked together, for several
   reasons (see g++-FAQ for details). 

Martin
-- 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Private email Martin.Cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de Fax +4940 522 8536. No NeXTMail!
 No guarantee for anything. Anyway, this posting is probably produced by one
 of my cats stepping on the keys. No, I don't have an infinite number of cats.
