Re: Socioeconomics, Ada, C++

[tedg@apollo.HP.COM (Ted Grzesik)]

In article <1991May18.022831.20653@grebyn.com> ted@grebyn.com (Ted Holden) writes:
>
>...(unimportant blathering deleted)...
>there are several FAR better answers out there in common usage, the most
>obvious of which is C++.  

Ahhhhhhh.  Ignorance is bliss.  I don't see C++ as such a great answer.  It's
not even a certified standard yet.  "Common usage" /= "FAR better answer".

>
>...(more unimportant blathering deleted)...
>are involved with Ada itself, the real kicker is that we are about to
>see the entire mainstream of American computer science using C++, and

Perhaps object-oriented programming, but certainly not C++.  The only thing
that stops me from calling Ada an OO language is that it stuck with a procedural
hierarchy defining objects instead of an object hierarchy defining procedures.

Does this guy Ted Holden hold stock in some C++ development firm?  Why the big
push for C++?

Just my opinions.

Ted Grzesik       Massachusetts Language Lab             Hewlett-Packard Company
tedg@apollo.hp.com                          Chelmsford, MA  (508) 256-6600 x5959
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
                                       -- Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens)