Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 14:54:47 12/20/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2005 at 17:41:00, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >On December 19, 2005 at 18:37:05, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On December 17, 2005 at 23:50:48, Zappa wrote: >> >>>It's really that simple. No one wants to deal with buffer overflows and memory >>>corruption and all the bitchwork of C so that your program runs in 0.01 seconds >>>rather than 0.1 seconds. >> >>Languages never die. >>Most of the lines of code in the world are written in COBOL. That's today. >> >>BASIC is still here. >> >>Fortran is still here. >> >>C and C++ won't die or go away. >> >>Ironically, the warnings issued that raised the controversy have to do with >>functions designed to fix the overrun bugs. > >True - but like old soldiers who never die but fade away... they'll fall >into dis-use. Who remembers B or BCPL or BLISS? > >But seriously, it looks like the entire OOPS movement was well-named. >It is software-bloat in an attempt to make a solitary profession be an >attempt to have Team Programming, like Extreme Programming. > >An utter waste. Some bland corporation's attempts, just like the government, >turns a beautiful language (C) into an ugly one (OOPS). > >Rubbish! I prefer C++ to C. For instance, an ADT in C++ as a template is a thing of beauty. An ADT in C using void pointers is a bletcherous, blasphemous hack of crap by comparison. That's on the one hand. On the other hand, it is pure myth that C++ reduces complexity. It only HIDES it. The complexity is not reduced in the slightest.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.