From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE, LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Xref: utzoo comp.object:3478 comp.lang.ada:5376 comp.software-eng:5559 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!netcomsv!jls From: jls@netcom.COM (Jim Showalter) Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.ada,comp.software-eng Subject: Advocacy Degenerating into Zealotry Message-ID: <1991May9.033123.26764@netcom.COM> Date: 9 May 91 03:31:23 GMT Sender: netnews@netcom.COM (USENET Administration) Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services UNIX System {408 241-9760 guest} Originator: jls@netcom.netcom.com List-Id: A week or so ago, I apologized to this group and several others for using harsh language. For those of you who missed that apology, the gist of it was that I was raised in a family that used earthy language as a sort of punctuation, and that, as a result, I need to constantly remind myself that some people have a very negative reaction to such language. (This was compounded by the fact that I assimilated my grasp of netiquette via osmosis--and such language is quite common on some of the groups I've browsed.) The reaction I got to the apology was quite positive: several e-mail responses complimented me not only for having the ability to compromise but for having the fortitude to issue a public apology. Well, as long as I'm on a roll, I'd ALSO like to apologize for the overall tone and content of several recent postings, specifically the ones concerning the readability of C/C++ and the ones contrasting C/C++ with Ada. I'm afraid that I let my frustration and passion get the better of me, and wound up sounding like a zealot, which is hardly the most effective way to influence people. In particular, I'm embarrassed about the claim that C++ "cannot be used to build large systems", which is, of course, patently false: there are several success stories concerning C++ on large projects. What I WISH I'd said was something more to the effect that there have been both successes and failures on projects using C++, that there are a number of issues that should be considered very carefully before jumping full-bore into using C++, and that, in the end, language issues pale to near-insignificance when compared to OTHER problems on large projects. As a general policy, I try to avoid loudly stating falsehoods, especially in a worldwide forum...but, that's what I get for posting while angry. The worst part about this is that, when I'm calm, I actually DO know a thing or two about software engineering: I've helped some of the largest corporations in the world be successful with some of the largest software projects ever attempted; I have a solid understanding of the problems that beset software organizations, and of proven approaches to fixing such problems; I've worked in both the commercial and the government side of things, on projects ranging from 6-people-typing-furiously-on-PCs to multi-million-line multi- million-dollar multi-year multi-site multi-processor real-time monsters; I even have a hardware background. Anyway, sorry for blowing up. I don't apologize for feeling passionate about software engineering--that's what makes work worth getting up for in the morning--but I WILL try to channel the energyin a more constructive manner from now on.