Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!usc!ucla-cs!uci-ics!rfg
From: rfg@ics.uci.edu (Ronald Guilmette)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: references to dereferenced null pointers
Message-ID: <26049900.5598@paris.ics.uci.edu>
Date: 19 Mar 90 08:32:00 GMT
References: <33209@brunix.UUCP> <3374@munnari.oz.au>
Reply-To: rfg@ics.uci.edu (Ronald Guilmette)
Organization: UC Irvine Department of ICS
Lines: 19

In article <3374@munnari.oz.au> sharam@munnari.oz.au writes:
>From article <33209@brunix.UUCP>, by sdm@cs.brown.edu (Scott Meyers):
>> Don't get me wrong: I like sugar as much as
>> anybody else, but syntactic sweetness has never been C++'s strong suit.  In
>> the case of references, I find that the confusion outweighs the
>> convenience.

In the case of references, I agree, but I fear that it is far to late to
get them removed from the language.

>I disagree. High level languages are all about syntactic sugaring;
>eliminate them and what you end up with is an assembler-like language.

Yes, but add too much "sugar" and you get Ada.


// Ron Guilmette (rfg@ics.uci.edu)
// C++ Entomologist
// Motto:  If it sticks, force it.  If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.