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!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!news.imag.fr!pinea.xerox.fr!news
From: freeman@coolidge.coolidge.grenoble.xerox.fr (Steve Freeman)
Subject: Re: C++ Productivity
In-Reply-To: dsiegel@panix.com's message of 4 Feb 1995 19:48:19 -0500
Message-ID: <FREEMAN.95Feb5132253@coolidge.coolidge.grenoble.xerox.fr>
Lines: 53
Sender: news@xerox.fr
Nntp-Posting-Host: coolidge.grenoble.rxrc.xerox.com
Reply-To: freeman@xerox.fr
Organization: Rank Xerox Research Centre
References: <1995Jan23.193745.7044@boole.com> <jim.fleming.84.00133AB6@bytes.com>
	<1995Jan25.201226.28856@rcmcon.com> <jim.fleming.75.0003AF13@bytes.com>
	<3gls1u$p2l@osfa.aber.ac.uk> <1995Feb1.184049.16332@rcmcon.com>
	<D3E33s.DCp@da_vinci.ecte.uswc.uswest.com>
	<1995Feb3.172403.2977@rcmcon.com> <3h178j$nrq@panix.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 12:22:53 GMT
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:111029 comp.lang.smalltalk:20373 comp.object:26158

In article <3h178j$nrq@panix.com> dsiegel@panix.com (David Siegel) writes:

> From: dsiegel@panix.com (David Siegel)
> Date: 4 Feb 1995 19:48:19 -0500
> Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC
> 
> In <1995Feb3.172403.2977@rcmcon.com> rmartin@rcmcon.com (Robert Martin) writes:
> 
> >As for type conversions, yes, it takes a while to get used to strong
> >typing.  However the benefits are significant.  Many of us prefer to
> >use strongly typed languages.
> 
> Which is why many of us prefer Smalltalk.  While C++ is more eagerly typed,
> it's much weaker -- keeping track of C++'s various implicit copies and
> conversions is mind-numbing.

I find strong typing tremendously useful once past the prototyping
stage, especially when done properly as in Eiffel or (my strong
personal favourite, ftp from gatekeeper.dec.com) Modula-3. My
experience with M3 is that I don't really need such a fancy
programming environment; I just let the compiler do more work. For
example, in M3 the exception list is part of the signature of a
procedure, so when I compile a procedure the compiler complains if
there any possible exceptions I'm not handling--of course, I can
override these complaints but it has to go in the code. C++ ignores a
specified exception list (not entirely, but it doesn't use it for
type-checking), so I have to hope that noone's raised some unusual
exception in the bowels of some library. This was done for the old
backwards-compatility reasons, which is fair enough, but it'll keep 
the tool-vendors busy.

Presumably, the C++ automatic copy and conversion stuff is a secret
plot to keep the C++ illuminati in consulting fees :-) Perhaps the
best thing is always to make them private, so they don't get called by
accident...

steve


-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dr. Steve Freeman, Research Scientist, Rank Xerox France.

Surface:  Rank Xerox Research Centre,
          6, chemin de Maupertuis, 38240 Meylan, France.
Internet: steve.freeman@xerox.fr
Phone:    +33 76 61 50 21
Fax:      +33 76 61 50 99


but wotthehel wotthehel
toujours gai
  -- mehitabel the cat
