From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on ip-172-31-65-14.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!Lx7EM+81f32E0bqku+QpCA.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Luke A. Guest" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Carbon Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2022 09:10:10 +0100 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="32919"; posting-host="Lx7EM+81f32E0bqku+QpCA.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org"; User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0 Content-Language: en-GB X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2 Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:64145 List-Id: On 26/07/2022 18:31, John McCabe wrote: > Certainly not the approach to making life easier and less error-prone for developers. Quel surprise! > I've got involved in a couple of discussions on their forum, and I'm inclined to think they just want C++ but taken out of the control of ISO/IEC WGs steering committees. > > They're pretty much not considering changing any of the aspects of C++ that make it such a heap of junk (IMO, of course), including, but not limited to: Doesn't surprise me, they never do. Every "I've built a new language to replace C or C++ and it's better" implement things the exact same way every time. > 1. arrays > 2. enums > 3. (both of the above when used together :-)) > 4. symbols - overuse, duplication, inconsistency > 5. implicit stuff > 6. pretend strong typing > 7. forcing developers to deal manually with numeric values that don't fit into an n-byte range, where n is a whole number > > It really is shockingly soul-destroying watching all that. What's worse is that, from what I've seen over the years, the new languages that have been developed in a more 'relaxed' way than Ada (well, evolved, really, like Java, Python etc) and have become relatively successful have taken a good 10 years or so to get to that point, yet the discussions on the Carbon forum are all about how to appeal to _current_ developers who're used to C++; not _future_ developers who, ideally, would _never_ be used to C++! > It's depressing dealing with cretin's who all think they're geniuses and think that their new idea is so radically different, but is just the same old crap wrapped up in a functional style.