Xref: utzoo comp.object:3573 comp.lang.c++:13610
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!lll-winken!sun-barr!newstop!exodus!rbbb.Eng.Sun.COM!chased
From: chased@rbbb.Eng.Sun.COM (David Chase)
Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: C++ and waitresses (long)
Message-ID: <13897@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 23 May 91 18:52:48 GMT
References: <2325@media03.UUCP>
Sender: news@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM
Followup-To: comp.object
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
Lines: 26

In article <2325@media03.UUCP> pkr@media03.UUCP (Peter Kriens) writes:
[a comparison of the wealth-of-choices available in C++ and American
restaurants].

I totally agree.  Around here, we call it "mandatory flexibility".
You WILL be flexible, you MUST make these choices, you CANNOT defer
these decisions.

Glad to hear somebody else feels this way about the Emperor's New
Language.  I've been using it for a year now, and I still think it
sucks.  Where's my garbage collection?  Where's my exception handling?
Where's my generics?  Where's my type-safe down-casting?  Why do I get
the feeling that the designers always had "fast" as their first
priority and "useful" as their second priority?

Oh well, not my job to tell people what tools to use.  If lemmings
want a highway to a cliff, I'll see (as a compiler writer) that you
get the best damn highway I can build.

(Since I've recently observed a massive failure in reading for
comprehension over in comp.arch (the "what's in the '586 thread" --
it's quite amusing), I guess it is wise to point out that this is my
opinion, and not Sun's.)

David Chase
Sun