Re: Problem trying to implement generics.

[Lao Xiao Hai <laoxhai@ix.netcom.com>]

Marin David Condic wrote:

> The "+=", et alia, were basically invented by people who couldn't type. I'd
> rather opt for the clarity in the expression and not worry about all the
> interesting ways of representing it in fewer keystrokes. After all, on any
> given day of the week *I'm* not a "competent" C programmer! (Especially
> before coffee in the AM!) I don't want to work that hard to understand what
> I did yesterday when I was fully awake.

Each language has its syntactical conventions and it is simply a matter of
becoming comfortable with them.    I have even encountered a few unusual
people who disliked vi. :-)         If my memory has not failed me, I seem to
recall that the +=, ++, and certain other shorthand constructs originate on
the platform for which C was originally designed, the PDP-11.    The same
is true of many other C syntactic novelties.

When incorporated into an object-oriented language such as C++ or Java,
these constructs cease to be novelties and become borderline pathological.
Certainly, they are anachronistic.    Then again, I am composing this message
on a QWERTY keyboard instead of the more efficient DVORAK keyboard.
Change comes hard, even when the change is clearly an improvement.  The
design of C# seems to have eliminated a few of the original pathologies, but
not all.

We each have our own criteria for what makes a good programming language.
I like a language where the compiler can maximize the amount of error detection
as early in the development process as possible.   For the most part, the C
family of languages fails that test.  I like a language where, at run-time, I
can
hope for minimal surprise.   The C family of languages fails that test.    Some
prefer a language that is popular.   The C family of languages will pass that
test.   Others prefer one that is quick to code quick to get executable
programs,
properly working or not.   The C family of languages does fairly well in that
category.

In recent years, with the advent of better tools, we can now develop Ada
programs as quickly as C or C++.   With graphical tools, we can build
GUI's that compare favorably to MSF or Java Bytecode.   So, when I also
say, I prefer a language that is highly portable,  Ada fulfills that need
quite nicely.   I can think of no good reason I would want to "take up arms
against a sea of troubles" and convert to any of the C family of languages.