Re: Time to rewrite dpkg
Chip Salzenberg <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Microsoft has followed, not led, the C++ herd. There were many C++
> compilers around before Microsoft's. I have fond memories of using
> Turbo C++ 1.0....
Yes, well, TC++ 1.0 was a much different language than the one the ISO
committee finally foisted off on us. :-)
> And yes, I also use C++ because I like it.
C++ is an *excellent* language, in many respects, but it does have
problems. It's huge, tricky, confusing, designed-by-committee, and
rather difficult to use *efficiently* from *other* languages.
Trying to wedge a C++ class into the known heirarchies of another OO
language is particularly difficult. (Esp. languages that don't
support multiple inheritance or templates or....) C++ is excellent at
adapting and adopting classes or libraries from other languages, but
not so good at exporting them to other languages.
The fact that C++'s object model is explicitely defined to be an
internal compiler detail, subject to change without notice, doesn't
Bottom line, there is no perfect language, there is no silver bullet.
Chris Waters email@example.com | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or firstname.lastname@example.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.