Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.object
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!mole-end!mat
From: mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us
Subject: Re: C++ Productivity
Message-ID: <1995Mar17.080506.22078@mole-end.matawan.nj.us>
Organization: :
References: <1995Feb1.184049.16332@rcmcon.com> <3j2hu0$90o@jabba.ess.harris.com> <3jl3u8$76e@jabba.ess.harris.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 08:05:06 GMT
Lines: 40
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:118013 comp.lang.smalltalk:21840 comp.object:28264

In article <3jl3u8$76e@jabba.ess.harris.com>, wdavis@dw3f.ess.harris.com (Bill Davis) writes:
> In article <1995Mar3.095109.7848@mole-end.matawan.nj.us>,
> mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us writes:
> |>
> |>In article <3j2hu0$90o@jabba.ess.harris.com>, wdavis@dw3f.ess.harris.com (Bill
> |>Davis) writes:
> |>
> |> ...
> |>> The lifetime of temporaries is another obvious case where the original
> |>> definition was wrong.  I don't have the latest information, but I did
> |>> read that ANSI has corrected this massive bit of brain damage.
> |> > |>Those are strong words!  Since they overconstrained the user and
> |>underconstrained the implementor, they hardly qualify as `brain damage.'
> |>If it were the other way around, of course ....
> 
> If we take Mark's idea to its logical conclusion, we would have
> a language that is easy to compile and impossible to use.  That would
> provide the least constraint on the language implementor and the
> greatest constraint on the language user.

If we take ideas to their `logical' conclusions, we (a) make a mockery of
logic and (b) end up talking like Freudians, for whom a kid's desire to
be like Daddy is a manifestation of the Father-Murder urge ....

The issue in question is whether, not knowing what decision to make, the
designer(s) of C++ should have chosen any one at all (on the assumption,
presumably, that there was nothing more to learn about the subject) or
should have been so conservative that a better choice could be made when
the knowledge was available.

Now, it's rare that Bjarne Stroustrup and his collaborators consider
themselves clew-challenged, but this time they apparently did, and they
acted so as to do no harm.

Put that in your Father-Murder urge and ... well, whatever you do with it.
-- 
 (This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end				Mark Terribile
 mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ
	(Training and consulting in C, C++, UNIX, etc.)
