Re: Why C++ is successful

[Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com>]

On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Pat Rogers wrote:
> Dave Martin wrote:
... snip ...
> >
> >Personally, for the last several years i've been trying to detect my
> >own hidden assumptions and biases, and nullify them.  I never want to
> >turn into the old dog who can't learn new tricks or becomes closed-
> >minded to something simply because its different.  Unfortunately I
> >haven't always been successful, but i'm trying.
> 
> That's why I'm learning Java now, and Eiffel and C++ in the past.  They all
> contribute something to make one a better developer.  I need to take another
> look at Fortran, because it sure isn't the Fortran IV I used in the old
> days!

I don't want to discourage anyone from learning new things, but IMO Java,
Ada, C++, and Eiffel are not really all that different, I'd even say they 
are pretty close in the whole space of programming languages. Why not try 
a few really different languages, like:

(1) A logic language, like Prolog or Mercury
(2) A functional language, like OCaml, Haskell, or Scheme
(3) An OO language with multimethods, like Common Lisp
(4) Any of a number of interesting other languages, like Forth, Icon, ...

This isn't meant as a disagreement with Pat Rogers. I actually like Ada 
and think it is worth knowing, just that if you want to stretch your mind 
and are not solely interested in getting a job using some particular 
language, it might be worth it to you to consider a wider range.

-- Brian