Thomas Hruska wrote:
> nimak247 wrote:
>   
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Ok, so I have downloaded a draft and begun going through it (over 600
>> pages -- sheesh, that's going to take a while) :o)
>>
>> In any case, it got me to thinking; If there is a standard, in what
>> instance is it desirable to write in manner that is not standard
>> compliant?
>>     
>
> The main problem is authors who teach C++ and incorporate non-ANSI 
> Standard functions, methodologies, etc. into their writings.  It is 
> important to be able to identify what is and what is not Standard.  Code 
> that is 100% Standard should compile and run identically everywhere.
>
> IMO, it would be okay to have a non-ANSI Standard C++ book as long as 
> the author isn't also trying to teach C++ _at the same time_.  When you 
> get into things such as TCP/IP (sockets), GUI development, databases, 
> multithreading, and the like, you are outside the realm of ANSI C++. 
> Even then most authors focusing on such topics tend to proclaim non-ANSI 
> Standard practices where they could be adhering to the Standard.
>
>
>   Obviously there are books out there that teach
>   
>> non-compliant methods, I guess I am wondering why that is?
>>     
>
> Money.  Some authors are not aware that there is even a Standard until 
> the community cries foul.  Several authors, such as Yashavant, don't 
> even care even after their errors are pointed out to them.
>
>
>   
>> Do all of the 'major' languages have standards? 
>>     
>
> Nope.  C/C++ are really the only major languages with official 
> Standards.  However, the ANSI Standards committees move WAY too slowly 
> on making changes and, IMO, they make bad choices when they do things 
> such as dump entire libraries (e.g. STL) into the Standard instead of 
> leaving them as free entities.
Since you brought it up, it is NOT a "whole nother discusion".  IMO it's 
a shame you never bothered to learn the Standard Library before you went 
off and wote "Safe C++"  As for things moving slowly, correct, but have 
you even bothered to look at the TR1 corrections/additions to the 
Standard Library
>   But that is a whole other discussion. 
> As such, some people view C/C++ as a "dead" language - or at least dying 
> a very painful and slow death.  Then again, those same people declared 
> Delphi dead and yet Spybot Search&Destroy, a very popular anti-spyware 
> app., is written in Delphi.
>
>   



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to