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!uunet!rcm!rmartin
From: rmartin@rcmcon.com (Robert Martin)
Subject: Re: C++ Productivity
Keywords: C++ Productivity Smalltalk
References: <1995Jan23.193745.7044@boole.com> <jim.fleming.84.00133AB6@bytes.com>
Organization: R. C. M. Consulting Inc. 708-918-1004
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 20:12:26 GMT
Message-ID: <1995Jan25.201226.28856@rcmcon.com>
Lines: 71
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:109290 comp.lang.smalltalk:19894 comp.object:25623

>> jka@boole.com (John Ahlstrom) writes:
>>[...] I was also interested in stories about GOOD C++ productivity.

jim.fleming@bytes.com (Jim Fleming) writes:
>I am not sure such a thing exists...now after 15 years many people
>have spent a lot of time looking for productivity in C++ and finding
>it in other places...at least C++ caused them to look beyond C...although
>some of us have been very productive in C...

This is an extremely warped view of the history of C++.  One might
think you had an axe to grind.  In the 15 years that C++ has been
evolving, it has steadily grown in popularity.  Presumably this was because
people liked it, and found it useful.  

In any case, let me describe my current, and very pleasant,
experiences with C++.

I, and my associates, are in the midsts of a very large project.  We
have been using C++ for two years, and have a year or so to go.  We
have found, as time goes by, that we are able to reuse more and more
of our classes.  (We are, of course, designing the code with reuse in
mind.)  Projects which used to take X weeks to complete, are now
taking roughly one third the time.  

We have created a strong foundation of classes in C++.  We have also
employed the principles of dependency management to ensure that our
compiles do not thrash, that our classes are reusable, and that when
changes occur, those changes do not ripple throughout the rest of the
code.  This strategy has paid off in spades.

>It is difficult to find any large C++ successes...

Not in my business.  My customers (many of whom are very large,
multi-billion dollar, corporations) are quite pleased with the results
they obtain from C++.  And, to judge from the popularity of the
language, many other people are too.

>The market did not make a choice...these decisions are
>made by the czars of information technology that live in
>ivory towers...

No.  You are quite mistaken about that.  Most of the early popularity
of C++ was based upon grass roots acceptance by engineers.  Current
popularity is based also upon availability and third party support.

Besides, how can you say that the market did not make a choice?  Of
course it did.  People are buying C++ compilers in droves.  They are
not buying Eiffel, or Smalltalk, or C+@ compilers in anything like the
numbers that C++ compilers are being sold.  That represents a choice.

You may argue that the choice is uninformed, but that is counter to my
experience.  Many of the people that I work with who have chosen C++
have done so for sound reasons.  You may argue that the decision was
forced upon them by some kind of "Czar" but that's just conspiracy
theory.  C++ is where it is today because it caught the popular
attention, and then was found to be useful.

>Besides, who said the games was over...??

The game is never over.  Someday, perhaps real soon, some other
language will gain the ascendancy over C++.  And the people who don't
like that language will say "The market really didn't make that
choice."  Whatever that language is, it will have its day in the sun,
and then some other language will displace it.  etc.


-- 
Robert Martin       | Design Consulting   | Training courses offered:
Object Mentor Assoc.| rmartin@rcmcon.com  |   Object Oriented Analysis
2080 Cranbrook Rd.  | Tel: (708) 918-1004 |   Object Oriented Design
Green Oaks IL 60048 | Fax: (708) 918-1023 |   C++
