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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,b92b95c9b5585075
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!195.96.0.7.MISMATCH!newsfeed.utanet.at!newsfeed01.chello.at!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 12:27:41 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110613 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why use C++?
References: <fb9f787c-af06-427a-82b6-b0684e8dcbc5@s2g2000vby.googlegroups.com>
 <j1kaj8$dge$1@adenine.netfront.net>
 <1e292299-2cbe-4443-86f3-b19b8af50fff@c29g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
 <j1tha5$11q5$1@adenine.netfront.net>
 <1fd0cc9b-859d-428e-b68a-11e34de84225@gz10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
 <9ag33sFmuaU1@mid.individual.net> <j1v17b$h98$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <1d8wyhvpcmpkd.ggiui9vebmtl.dlg@40tude.net> <j203cu$q97$1@dont-email.me>
 <150vz10ihvb5a.1lysmewa1muz4$.dlg@40tude.net> <j20cif$dr6$1@dont-email.me>
 <1q4c610mmuxn7$.1k6s78wa0r8fj.dlg@40tude.net> <j22c68$2m7$1@dont-email.me>
 <4e44e50a$0$7619$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <j23fvr$gsf$1@dont-email.me>
 <4e4560e7$0$6546$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <j2407a$3qv$1@dont-email.me>
In-Reply-To: <j2407a$3qv$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4e46519e$0$7614$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Aug 2011 12:27:42 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 847babb6.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=]=O2e_@C84]E47KDAk81NWic==]BZ:af^4Fo<]lROoRQ<`=YMgDjhgRY]kYm`@K4aUPCY\c7>ejVX[>g@JBWoL>Ro012[gKe9@Q
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.c++:82919 comp.lang.ada:20598
Date: 2011-08-13T12:27:42+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 12.08.11 21:51, Jed wrote:

> So the benefit, then, just not having to learn something?


"Oh no, not again."


(1) If you need to know X in order to write program P, you
     should have learned X.

(2) If you do not need to know X for writing P, having
     learned X neither helps nor hurts. (e.g. X ::= float)

(3) If a language L1 requires X for P, you must learn X.

(4) If a language L2 doesn't require X for P, you may
     learn X, but need not.

(5) If P produced by L1 equals P produced by L2, then
     we don't need X for P.  QED

(There may be other reasons for needing both L1 and L2,
but not X for P.)

When a language L2 exists, its existence demonstrates that
we can drop features of L1 and still get P, exactly.

If X has show that it can hurt, this may be incentive
to drop X for a better replacement.