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
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,54c513170bafd693
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Hyman Rosen <hymie@prolifics.com>
Subject: Re: Desirability of C++
Date: 2000/05/01
Message-ID: <t7r9bmjnf7.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 617878465
Sender: hymie@calumny.jyacc.com
References: <01HW.B4BFC2820005B06B08A24140@news.pacbell.net>
 <20000204073443.24976.00001288@ng-ci1.aol.com> <87euk0$c93$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <Pine.BSF.4.21.0002040920070.2217-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>
 <01HW.B4C1346100072D2408A24140@news.pacbell.net>
 <949867976.281549@the-rowan.albatross.co.nz>
 <8766v93w66.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>
 <F721B334E5BE49E3.6D9E1F7A7C81C3CE.9B64FD843F046A46@lp.airnews.net>
 <sc336dpgee6168@corp.supernews.com> <38E8C81A.AA62CF4C@HiWAAY.net>
 <hoffman-ya02408000R1204002048410001@news.insync.net>
 <7EA1B852F5D4D8C6.26EEE9181C80F0DF.0161EA2D9C353253@lp.airnews.net>
 <01HW.B51C1B6E00F41C2D04BB51B0@news.pacbell.net>
 <38F796B2.A99A206A@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com> <38F7A27A.4F7729FA@raytheon.com>
 <8eclae$afj$1@slb7.atl.mindspring.net>
 <4F706057FEE2A550.BF5FE19AE279EFCD.A55706B3F9D07043@lp.airnews.net>
 <8eiv08$820$1@slb1.atl.mindspring.net> <390D001C.7433140B@netwood.net>
 <390D58F9.7CC64B85@maths.unine.ch>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com
X-Trace: news.panix.com 957195181 9932 209.49.126.226 (1 May 2000 15:33:01
 GMT)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 May 2000 15:33:01 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-05-01T15:33:01+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> writes:
> Could C++ functions return things other than an integer or a pointer,
> or would there a simple way in C++ to make arrays with bounds but no OO bloat,
> the frustration about performance would be in the direction you  mention.

What does that mean? C++ functions can return things other than integers
and pointers, and there is a simple way in C++ to make arrays with bounds
but no OO bloat.

> Then a more advanced modularity, increased features for types
> other than the basic ones and a more readable syntax - important.
> I'm sure C2010 will ressemble much to a known language ;-)

While C++ syntax can sometimes be abysmal, I am 100% convinced that the
main reason for the lack of Ada's popularity is its Pascal-derived syntax.
Even after many attempts, I still can't look at a chunk of Ada code without
my eyes swimming from the mass of undifferentiated text. If the designers
had gone with {/} instead of is/begin/end, this could have been a different
world. (And yes, I know that the internationalists wouldn't hear of using
curly braces back then.)