Re: The Next Microsoft?

[Hyman Rosen <hymie@prolifics.com>]

Mark Atwood <mra@pobox.com> writes:
> Early C++, you are right. But once the committee started on it, they
> could never say no to any seriously proposed feature, so now the language
> is too big for the human brain.

What are these features that you are talking about? What features are
present in Standard C++ that were absent in Early C++? The only thing
that comes close that I can think of is the internationalization of
stream I/O, and it was absolutely necessary to do this or there would
have been no standard at all.

My allegedly human brain can encompass Standard C++ enough so that I
can use it.  When I need precise detail, I refer to the Standard.

> Nobody uses C++, they only use either a preferred or a
> in-house-mandated subset dialect.

Ravenscar Profile. Nyah nyah! You are being ridiculous. Have you looked
at Microsoft's ATL class libraries, for example?

> True, the STL model is nice and can fit in one competent brain. Pity
> that it's realized in such a horrible language.

The STL model is a direct result of the desire to write high-level
algorithms on fancy containers using the exact style that C programmers
use to process arrays, namely with pointer arithmetic. Indeed, STL
algorithms apply directly to raw C arrays. STL and C/C++ make a perfect
fit.