From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin C.Atkins To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] g++ Message-Id: <20030914144757.30e9b14c.martin@parvat.com> In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:47:57 +0530 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 34bc2d30-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 Hi Charles, On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:39:47 +0100 C H Forsyth wrote: >... > since c++ and java enthusiasts often don't spend a lot I'm interested that you lump in Java with C++ here, since I thought that Java had removed most of the things that you listed as being difficult to control in C++. Java also adds interfaces, which addresses the single biggest flaw (IMHO) of C++. (Types should be based on what things do, not on how they are constructed) What is it about the Java language that you think causes the trouble? (of course, there are many things about Java implementations to dislike.) Looking back at your previous message, perhaps it is the "scope rules and silent actions associated with inheritance", in which case are there any "Object Oriented" languages that you think are OK? (I'm assuming that you don't class Limbo as "Object Oriented" here! :-) Martin -- Martin C. Atkins martin@parvat.com Parvat Infotech (Private) Limited http://www.parvat.com