In article <Pine.SOL.4.30.0104060544510.25974-100000 at mimosa.csv.warwick.ac.uk>, John J. Lee <phrxy at csv.warwick.ac.uk> wrote: >On 5 Apr 2001, Cameron Laird wrote: > >> In article <mailman.986484978.19207.python-list at python.org>, >> Simon Brunning <SBrunning at trisystems.co.uk> wrote: >[...] >> 2. C++: it might be an OK language, but look at >> the destruction it leaves in its wake. > >Explain? . . . I thought I was being cute--specifically, I was trying lightly to inspire, "Look, even a discussion *about* using C++ leaves c.l.p in shambles; imagine what an actual implementation does to a project team." I'm serious about that. Maybe it's wonderful stuff--in fact, I've been fond of C++ at several times, and still use it frequently--but anything (like children's organized sports in the USA, certain religions, and Kashmiri cartography) that inspires such violent clashes makes me wonder whether a better approach isn't overdue. The complementary point I also recognize, of course: C++ is about such important things that it's *worth* starting a fight. -- Cameron Laird <claird at NeoSoft.com> Business: http://www.Phaseit.net Personal: http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/home.html
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4