[Novalug] dynamic symbolic links

James Ewing Cottrell, III jecottrell3@comcast.net
Wed Apr 29 19:26:49 EDT 2015


You say you never call people Stupid, but you just told me I have no clue. Shall I send you my resume?

Who says I don't understand OO patterns? My quibble is with C++, not any of the other languages.

What I meant was that We are Smart Enough to Know What We Like, and Judge it as Good or Bad. Not Everything is Wonderful, and I reserve the Right to live in what I consider to be the Rational Subset of it. No One Can Do Everything.

C++ is NOT the "Foundation for OO"....Smalltalk is. C++ was a Compromise designed to be compatible with C. References and Pointers, obscure rules about Copying vs Initialization Constructors, Friend classes and functions...none of this do I see in other OO languages. Perhaps the Greatest Strength of C++ is not relying on GC.

And actually, Neither C++ nor Java are truly OO, as the basic types are exposed. However, that doesn't really bother me all that much.

JIM

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Larsen" <peter@peterlarsen.org>
To: "James Ewing Cottrell, III" <jecottrell3@comcast.net>, "John Holland" <jholland@vin-dit.org>
Cc: novalug@firemountain.net
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 2:39:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Novalug] dynamic symbolic links

You really have no clue I think.

On 04/29/2015 01:49 PM, James Ewing Cottrell, III wrote:
> C is good...it's Simple...but C++ is just Insane.

Example? C++ is the foundation for Object Orientered programming in a
modern paradigm. It did a full and true OO implementation. Every other
mishandled that by implementing restrictions on the theory "for
simplicity sake" like removing multi inheritance. What part of C++ is
insane? Granted, I haven't used it for a decade or so - but I would love
to know. But if you don't understand the OO design patterns then yes,
you'll be confused by a true OO language.

>  Java has cleaned up a bunch of its Ugliness.

Java extracted PARTS of the features of C++ and tried to automate memory
management. Which has now become the biggest issue at design time for
large Java programs - they run out of memory because the memory
management engine isn't smart enough or the programmer doesn't know how
to "hint" at the JVM to clean up memory. There's a huge penalty vs.
doing it with C++.
What Java tried to solve wasn't OO - it was being portable. And that
almost worked. But it's not a great example for implementing OO
principles like those laid out by Bjarne Stroustrup for C++ - which btw
also allows you to implement things procedural.  Java isn't not a good
alternative if you want efficient code as compared to C++.

>
> Better still, learn Python or Ruby.

Big words - let's first understand the use case before we say what
language is the best.


>
> JIM
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Holland via Novalug" <novalug@firemountain.net>
> To: "Peter Larsen" <peter@peterlarsen.org>
> Cc: novalug@firemountain.net
> Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 5:50:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [Novalug] dynamic symbolic links
>
> Peter, thanks for this extensive response. I just now got to read it.  I guess I’m over the hill, I don’t have as much motivation to learn new things. Lately I’ve been trying to learn C and C++  but not putting in enough time on it.
>
> John


-- 
Regards
  Peter Larsen






More information about the Novalug mailing list