On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Craig Dickson wrote:
[]
> With such optimism about programmers, I'm astounded that you're writing from
> a .com rather than a .edu address. :-) My experience in industry has led me
> to quite different conclusions. Many C/C++ programmers seem not to recognize
> pointer issues as a problem, or at least, one with a viable solution;
> when offered languages with built-in GC, they say things like, "I like doing my
> own memory management; it gives me more control and makes it clearer what's
> really going on in the program." As I pointed out in a previous message,
> most of these people can't really handle the power that this "more control"
> gives them, but they have a blind spot that prevents them from recognizing
> that this is a problem.
I believe that stagnacy is more widespread than creativity and logical
thinking, too :(
That said, you don't have to use pointers in C++ that much. Legacy code
can be a problem, though. Besides, I think the management should be blamed
for that, too. They should listen to programmers and pay attention to
_recurrent_ problems.
Anyway, that my-language-is-better-than-yours war is ridiculous. But it
certainly pointed out one fact: a FPL isn't the first programming language
for most FP people!
Andrei
Having worked for poor management, they no longer value their jobs.
---
Geoffrey James, "Tao of Programming".
