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: 103376,ab1d177a5a26577d
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 17:35:23 -0600
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:35:07 -0500
From: "Peter C. Chapin" <PChapin@vtc.vsc.edu>
Subject: Re: What's wrong with C++?
In-Reply-To: 
 <104cfd9f-dbf5-4f05-9c4a-a2319dd371a9@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.WNT.2.00.1102161829430.1328@WHIRLWIND>
References: 
 <104cfd9f-dbf5-4f05-9c4a-a2319dd371a9@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (WNT 1167 2008-08-23)
X-X-Sender: pcc09070@vtc.vsc.edu@webmail.vtc.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: 
 sv3-quWeB2j2clCeXQRv/tRgGcGK0J/JCIWEVRHXLfGeqF2v7bY3TSikzwFGKzEvedOzWCJsoCfBNbdXQk2!0JqlKsABIFMJErfqtOAY0ZWuzHUdZLKJ2eFDEtW7/jVo3VU9K8XvyiqhgqPoF+6+E+scb3MUAg==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2401
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17318
Date: 2011-02-16T18:35:07-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Hyman Rosen wrote:

> It sounds like a complaint that C++ requires source inclusion (directly or 
> via preprocessor #include directives) of type and object declarations into 
> a compilation unit, while other languages have syntax for requesting a 
> type set (class, package, etc.) whose definition is then sought out by the 
> compiler in an implementation-dependent way. Personally, I don't find the 
> long strings of 'import ...;' or 'with ...; use ...;' statements any more 
> appealing than '#include "header.h"', but I suppose it's "purer".

C++'s model of #include is a major project because the compiler does not 
really know what is going on and the preprocessor can do arbitrary editing 
of source code. For example

#include <someheader.h>
#include <someotherheader.h>

A macro defined in someheader.h might change the meaning of the declarations 
in someotherheader.h. I've had this happen to me many times... in headers 
that I did not write and over which I have no control. Often the problem can 
be fixed by rearranging the order of #includes or by selectively #undef 
certain macros. However, it's a problem that just shouldn't exist.

Peter