Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ukma!gatech!ncsuvx!ecemwl!jnh
From: jnh@ecemwl.ncsu.edu (Joseph N. Hall)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: C++ Not Ready for Commercial Use
Message-ID: <4210@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>
Date: 17 Oct 89 18:21:51 GMT
References: <24.UUL1.3#913@acw.UUCP> <6590301@hplsla.HP.COM> <12294@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com>
Sender: news@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: jnh@ecemwl.UUCP (Joseph N. Hall)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Lines: 40

In article <12294@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> ekrell@hector.UUCP (Eduardo Krell) writes:
>In article <6590301@hplsla.HP.COM> jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock) writes:
>
>>Can anyone give any examples of someone who has been programming in C++ for
>>more than a couple of months who would willing program in any other language,
>>let alone any other dialect of C?
>
>The answer is yes. If you promise anonymity and immunity from prosecution,
>send me e-mail and I'll give you more than one example.
>
My biggest concern with C++ is portability.  Right now a variety of major
environments are either unsupported or poorly supported; to wit, VMS, the
IBM PC (Zortech C++ notwithstanding), the DECstation 3100, etc.  I don't
think C has any intrinsic advantages as a language or programming environment
over C++ (although there are probably OTHER language subsets that are
superior to their larger kin).  I expect the portability issues to evaporate
within 1-2 years, and even for cross-compilers shortly thereafter.

C++ is flexible, complex and multifaceted, and is to C what the Z80 was to
the 8080 -- in my opinion.  It will inevitably replace C in the vast majority
of areas where C is used now.  It is nearly ideal as a systems-level
programming language for the current generation of graphically-oriented
workstations, and is suitable as a replacement for FORTRAN in mathematical
applications (given tight code generation).  It's the next wave, like it
or not.  (I like it but I wouldn't claim it as my own, if you know what
I mean.)

Aside from the issues of portability, my biggest concern with working in C++
is the horror of maintaining a large C++ project.  I've found that generally
C++ projects include much greater quantities of header files and are generally
quite difficult to organize so that recompilation takes a sensible amount
of time.  What I WOULD like to see incorporated into the AT&T system is
some method of handling incremental compilation and linking, and/or some
kind of "project dictionary" in which the declarations can be stored in
a precompiled form, in order to eliminate the 5000-line-header-wait problem.

v   v sssss|| joseph hall                      || 4116 Brewster Drive
 v v s   s || jnh@ecemwl.ncsu.edu (Internet)   || Raleigh, NC  27606
  v   sss  || SP Software/CAD Tool Developer, Mac Hacker and Keyboardist
-----------|| Disclaimer: NCSU may not share my views, but is welcome to.