From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] g++ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed References: <200309130329.h8D3Tbj15625@augusta.math.psu.edu> <3F631775.1050700@nospam.com> From: Brantley Coile MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3F631775.1050700@nospam.com> User-Agent: Opera7.11/Win32 M2 build 2887 Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 10:26:47 -0400 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 34a5a524-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 While I've been successful at avoiding C++, I did begin long enough ago to co-exist with PL/I. It too was a very difficult, tricky, special-case-ridden language. We learned a subset, as you suggest, of the language, but that didn't help you when we were faced with other's code. I remeber the first time I read the Pascal report and how excited I was that I could pretty much understand the entire language. The importance of this seems to have been lost. (But even C seems to have grown beyound understanding. I understand the C99 is a 512 page report and an upcomming book that comments on the standard is over 2,000 pages.) Any programming language that takes more than 50 pages to describe is a problem. Brantley On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 09:11:17 -0400, bs wrote: > Dan Cross wrote: >>> it's a very difficult, tricky, special-case-ridden language that takes taste >>> and experience to use well. >> >> >> Thanks. That more eloquently expresses what I was trying to get across. >> >> Related, one can write useful, relatively clean code by ignoring 90% of >> the language. Unfortunately, most people don't do that. >> > To that extent I use embedded C++ standards in my normal C++ development. It usually stays readable. > >