Xref: utzoo comp.lang.ada:5712 comp.lang.c++:14201
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!olivea!decwrl!netcomsv!jls
From: jls@netcom.COM (Jim Showalter)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: c++ vs ada results
Message-ID: <1991Jun18.215311.18473@netcom.COM>
Date: 18 Jun 91 21:53:11 GMT
References: <1991Jun12.201740.16463@netcom.COM> <1991Jun16.041037.11606@kithrup.COM> <1991Jun18.041751.3740@netcom.COM> <1991Jun18.083308.29358@kithrup.COM>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  UNIX System {408 241-9760 guest}
Lines: 19

I think this discussion, like so many others on the net, eventually
degenerates into an argument over semantics. You say you have learned
C++ but haven't mastered it, because you are able to write decent
simple programs in it that don't use the more advanced features (such
as inheritance, in your example). There are others that would claim
that you have NOT learned C++, any more than a person who can only
multiply single digit numbers together has learned multiplication.
I'm not really sure where the line between "learn" and "master"
lies in this case, and I'm not sure it's worth net bandwidth
to argue the point.

Incidentally, I would be interested in knowing if you had already
learned (or mastered, whatever) C before you learned C++. If so,
then your claim that it is "easy" to learn C++ is fairly biased.
-- 
*** LIMITLESS SOFTWARE, Inc: Jim Showalter, jls@netcom.com, (408) 243-0630 ****
*Proven solutions to software problems. Consulting and training on all aspects*
*of software development. Management/process/methodology. Architecture/design/*
*reuse. Quality/productivity. Risk reduction. EFFECTIVE OO usage. Ada/C++.    *