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: 103376,5af5c381381ac5a7
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!colt.net!news.tele.dk!feed118.news.tele.dk!dotsrc.org!filter.dotsrc.org!news.dotsrc.org!not-for-mail
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada requires too much typing!
References: <htnk3r02s27@drn.newsguy.com>
 <hto4st$7g2$1@news.eternal-september.org> <hu3u6e024bi@drn.newsguy.com>
 <op.vdve3ko0z25lew@macpro-eth1.krischik.com> <m21vck5uzp.fsf@pushface.org>
 <op.vdvntvqyz25lew@macpro-eth1.krischik.com>
 <af8f8146-08a9-4ad9-8eed-edbc1a6bbc55@y11g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
 <op.vdxa48vdz25lew@macpro-eth1.krischik.com>
 <03f84a0a-e070-43a9-9b68-920345f64f94@r27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <op.vdxqmnd6z25lew@macpro-eth1.krischik.com>
 <1c704c1e-1b2e-427f-ae0e-3b2a0f976c7c@y4g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 10:53:10 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: "Martin Krischik" <krischik@users.sourceforge.net>
Organization: Martin Krischik, Softwareentwicklung
Message-ID: <op.vdy4awkuz25lew@macpro-eth1.krischik.com>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.53 (MacIntel)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.236.175.138
X-Trace: news.sunsite.dk
 DXC=`Xk6=HQT[SWl<TLD@03MfXYSB=nbEKnk[lJ4Jde[nCkPIDiY_4:UK?Sd3N<Hj?FVI^>ai^>E:QM5T2e^5VLiC>9Vf029]9g<RG^
X-Complaints-To: staff@sunsite.dk
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:12434
Date: 2010-06-08T10:53:10+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Am 08.06.2010, 09:46 Uhr, schrieb Maciej Sobczak  
<see.my.homepage@gmail.com>:

> In other words, you have been exposed to the overly object-oriented
> style.

And how is that any better then the over templatized way used today?

> As I've already said - this design approach is representative for
> '80s. There is a reason for why today's most acknowledged libraries
> are not designed this way.

Yes, but it's speed over everything again. This is why the why the STL  
“classes” have no virtual destructor. vector<> had to be as fast as the  
build in array. And the rest of the STL has been designed from there. Any  
design compromise acceptable as long as speed is not compromised.

I don't like the STL much. The reason is that foremost I see myself as an  
OO programmer and the language is just a tool. I have done OO on C -  
including inheritance and virtual dispatch. For me an object must support  
inheritance and the STL does not. Therefore the STL is just a collections  
of utilities outside the OO framework.

Reading the rest of you post I wonder if C++ has given up on being an  
object orientated language? Perhaps becoming a generic (metaprogramming)  
language instead.

Martin
-- 
Martin Krischik
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
https://sourceforge.net/users/krischik