[MUD-Dev] Languages

Jeff Kesselman jeffk at tenetwork.com
Thu May 22 10:04:44 New Zealand Standard Time 1997


At 08:37 AM 5/22/97 PST8PDT, you wrote:
>Chris Gray wrote:
>> 
>> I've read enough on C++ to know
>> that its unlikely I'll ever use it, and I fail to see any contributions
>> it has made to the state of the art (fight'n words, I know!). I do need
>> to read up on Java, however.
>
>AMEN!!!!! I have offered the same two challenges to every C++ programmer
>I've met. No one has ever satisfactorily responded.
>
>	1. Show me one thing object oriented programming does which proper 
>	structured programming discipline can not.

**shrug**

Show me one thing structured programmign does that assembly code cannot...

Ultimately its ALl going down to machienc ode, so by your argument you
shoudl do all your progrmaming there.

Programmign paradigms are useful because they help us structrue the chaos
that is code.  Languages that provide syntactic sugar to supprot thsoe
paradigms are useful becauss they both cut down on the amoutn of work we
need to do to implement those paradigms as well as pushign us to do those
thinsg a little mroe properly.

In short, the answer to question 1 is Mu.

>
>	2. Show me one C++ construct that is impossible to implement in C.
>

Same arguiment, same answer.

Soudsn to me liek you have religon. Religon is a dangerous thing in the
programmign world.

JK




More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list