Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!mcvax!ukc!strath-cs!glasgow!orr
From: orr@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Fraser Orr)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Should C++ follow C's footsteps?
Message-ID: <2438@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>
Date: 17 Feb 89 13:17:22 GMT
References: <4800051@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <8902@alice.UUCP>
Reply-To: orr%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk (Fraser Orr)
Organization: Comp Sci, Glasgow Univ, Scotland
Lines: 24

In article <8902@alice.UUCP> ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) writes:
>C++ is already somewhat incompatibile with C, of course.  The question
>is: under what circumstances is is worthwhile for it to become
>more so?

If C++ is already somewhat incompatible, would it not be wise to leave C
syntax behind entirely? Two reasons why, 

1) I think most people would agree that a great deal of it is pretty
crummy (do I presume to much?  does anyone actually like the "for" loop
syntax?)

2) by having it so close to C syntax, one might easily be decieved into
thinking that it is the same, thus leading to all sorts of errors.  If
your going to create a new language, either it has got to be 100% (with
the exception of keywords and things of that kind perhaps) compatible,
or VERY different.

Any comments,


==Fraser Orr ( Dept C.S., Univ. Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK)
UseNet: {uk}!cs.glasgow.ac.uk!orr       JANET: orr@uk.ac.glasgow.cs
ARPANet(preferred xAtlantic): orr%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk