Re: C+++, yes three pluses

[jgg@evb.com (John Goodsen)]

>It seems to me that new computer language features emerge first
>as pre-processors to existing languages.  Recall RATFOR before
>structured FORTRAN and now Classic-Ada before Ada 9X.  If indeed
>Ada 9X has all of the OO features of C++ plus more good things BUT
>is not packaged in a way to appeal to the mass market then it seems
>to me that re-oackaging Ada 9X is the thing to do.  i.e. write a 9X
>pre-processor, call it C+++, and use the keywords, strucures etc. that the mass market wants.  Hide the 9X compiler inside where noone sees it.
>Build a visual programming front-end too for the click and drag
>people who think an object is something you "see".
>
>I am not a tool-builder but it seems to me that the folks in
>California should be able to build such a 9X pre-processor
>in one or two weeks, once the user interface was defined.
>

Excellent idea, Sam, except that when
you create "pre-processor" code, you usually tend break all
of the other tools in your development environment that have no
idea about this preprocessor.  Hence, if it's an important enough
*feature* (and I believe that using CLASS syntax in Ada 9X is),
then you've really got to make it a part of the core language.

We agree conceptually that you need to repackage Ada 9X to hit
the OOP market, but a preprocessor, "add-on" solution isn't 
going to cut it from a language marketing perspective.




-- 
John Goodsen
Software Process & Environments
EVB Software Engineering
jgg@evb.com