Re: Why use C++?

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 03:20:55 -0500, Jed wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message 
> news:1d8wyhvpcmpkd.ggiui9vebmtl.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:37:28 -0500, Randy Brukardt wrote:
>>
>>> There are uses for wrapping types, but they are far less likely than wanting
>>> overflow detection. The default should be to catch errors, not turn them
>>> into different ones.
>>
>> The OP mentioned image processing, the behavior frequently needed there is
>> saturated integer arithmetic, which is nether ranged nor modular.
>>
>> As for modular types, wrapping is the mathematically correct behavior, 
>> it is not an error.
>>
>> You just cannot provide every possible arithmetic at the language 
>> level.
>>
> 
> What do you think the practical level of limitation is?

Types that cannot be constructed by the operations of the types algebra 
provided by the language. Richer the algebra is, less built-in types 
needed.

> Were you thinking "beyond integers" with your statement?

There is nothing special in integer types, except that for the types 
algebra you need ordinal numerals (i.e. at least one integer type).

> What kinds of integer types would 
> you like to see built-in to a hypothetical ideal language?

As little as possible. Usage of predefined integer types makes design more 
fragile. E.g. it is bad when somebody uses Ada's Integer, or C++ int (OK, 
in C++ there is no other option), instead of introducing a type reflecting 
the application semantics rather than the decision of some compiler vendor 
motivated by other concerns.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de