Xref: utzoo comp.software-eng:3020 comp.lang.c:26498 comp.lang.misc:4315 comp.object:1014 comp.lang.c++:6702 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!mcsun!inria!loria!tombre From: tombre@crin.fr (Karl Tombre) Newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.misc,comp.object,comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: problems/risks due to programming language Message-ID: Date: 1 Mar 90 00:31:32 GMT References: <6960@internal.Apple.COM> <259@eiffel.UUCP> Sender: news@loria.crin.fr Organization: INRIA Lorraine -- CRIN, Nancy, France Lines: 44 In-reply-to: bertrand@eiffel.UUCP's message of 1 Mar 90 03:33:27 GMT In article <259@eiffel.UUCP> bertrand@eiffel.UUCP (Bertrand Meyer) writes: From by melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger): > Personally, it's the little things like this that make me > believe that everyone should ABANDON C and move on to C++(two others being > function prototyping and strong type checking). Waddya think? Wither C? How can the words ``strong type checking'' be applied to a language in which any variable may be cast to any type? In which you declare the type of a generic list element to be ``pointer to characters''? C++ only magnifies the problems of C, and it does not even have the excuses that can be invoked in the case of a 20-year old design such as C. [and so on] Am I the only one having regularly the following problem? I think Eiffel is a very good language (probably one of the best), I am quite impressed by its design. I also appreciate Bertrand Meyer's various technical and scientifical contributions in conferences and newsgroups. But from time to time, this attitude of his comes up and annoys me VERY MUCH : he seems to have difficulties accepting that there are other solutions for object-oriented programming, that other languages exist and are popular for various reasons. He especially tends to become "rabid" when speaking of C++. This leaves such a bad "taste in my mouth" that it tends to give me unjustly biased views of Mr. Meyer's product, i.e. Eiffel. That any "neutral" user gives his opinion about the merits or deficiencies of C++, Eiffel, Smalltalk, Cobol, BASIC or whatever is just fine. But shouldn't it be plain decency to restrain from commenting in such strong and passionnate terms about one's concurrents' products ? Especially for somebody wishing not to be a marketing person but to be known as an authority in OO languages and design ? I remember for instance reading some time ago, in the news, comments from either Brad Cox or Bjarne Stroustrup about the other's language; at no time did it have such a bad taste than the referenced article. Isn't it on the border of arrogance to believe that "I know the definite, final and only TRUTH about how an object-oriented language should be designed" ??? -- Karl Tombre - INRIA Lorraine / CRIN EMAIL : tombre@loria.crin.fr - POST : BP 239, 54506 VANDOEUVRE CEDEX, France