Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!solaris.cc.vt.edu!news.vt.edu!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!buzzard
From: buzzard@world.std.com (Sean T Barrett)
Subject: OT C++ was: Hardware z-machine?
Message-ID: <GHJyLD.J8q@world.std.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:46:24 GMT
References: <RjZ87.42028$SK6.5071866@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com> <PgHa7.14927$uj2.2558297@news02.optonline.net> <9kg2r2$ru1$1@watserv3.uwaterloo.ca> <DsVa7.22245$uj2.3745638@news02.optonline.net>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Lines: 15
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.arts.int-fiction:90649

Larry Smith <lrsFive(repl_Five_by_5)@optonline.net> wrote:
>The problem here is that there are subtleties in designing a programming
>language that most people never appreciate. If you're interested in this,
>you might want to check out Stroustrup's book, "The Design and Evolution of
>C++".

The overriding theme of which is that C++ contains any number of
misfeatures because its primary design goal was "success in the
marketplace" not "quality of language". Thus when someone bashes
C++ for a bad design (by the standards of "quality of language"),
it's an irrelevant response to say "but that's the only way it
could have succeeded to reach so many programmers"; it's still
a bad design.

SeanB
