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=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,886a64ba36f4b9be
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: C++ standard - how standard
Date: 2000/05/09
Message-ID: <8f912c$u7b$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 621085596
References: <20000509051326.16832.00002123@ng-fz1.aol.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x34.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue May 09 12:41:52 2000 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 2000-05-09T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <20000509051326.16832.00002123@ng-fz1.aol.com>,
  anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR) wrote:

> I can appreciate there is a standard for C++. Hasn't this
> standard been warped to both alienate compatability and
> portability.

Where on earth does this question come from? Sounds like you
are parrotting something you heard, which was probably
parrotting something they heard etc with the ultimate source
being nothing more than uninformed opinion.

There are many legitimate criticisms of C++ for sure, but
vague unsubstantiated viewpoints like this one are hardly
helpful. In fact the C++ standard is a remarkable piece of
work, that is generally accepted by the C++ community (not
an easy task, given the diversity). Sure there are some
*specific* criticisms that some make (the same is true
of any language standard), but to say that it is warped
is way off mark in my view.

> I don't hate or dislike C++ but on the other don't use it
> simply because of the difficulty in other programmers being
> able to READ and debug my code and vice versa.

That's a reasonable viewpoint, but it is it really based on
your own technical conclusions. Given the question above, one
has to wonder???

> I am human, un-omi-potent and have a finite conciousness and
> don't understand all the different nuaces c programmers are
> able to put in their code.

Wait a moment, we were talking about C++ and suddently now
we are talking about C. I hope you do not make the common
mistake of lumping these very different languages together.
Yes, of course we know that C++ is technically a superset
of C, but Fortran-90 is a superset of Fortran-2 as well,
and no one would make the mistake of lumping those languages
together :-)

> I like other coders to be able to understand my code and tell
> me of a problem and vice versa. Rather than being delighted
> when they can understand it. is this unreasonable ?

No, it is not unreasonable, in fact it is conventional wisdom
on this newsgroup :-)

What is more interesting is if you can add something specific
in the way of technical considerations that is original with
you on this point.

For instance, to *you* what is the single most important issue
in C++ vs Ada with respect to the readability issue?


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.