On Nov 12, 2007 1:12 PM, Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sure other > > languages are better (indeed, because of C++'s popularity, it nearly > > impossible for a language that is worse than C++ to survive as anything > > but a niche or legacy language), but they clearly aren't overwhelmingly so. > > And there we disagree. The combination of context-sensitive grammar, > non-managed environment and static compilation really are major misfeatures. > > Even worse, nobody seems really interested in correcting them. There's > no particular reason a C/C++ implementation couldn't gain those things. > However, anybody who would be motivated to do so seems to realize that > other languages have already done so and have more benefits besides. > > Maybe CIL or LLVM will help that situation.
Herb Sutter and Microsoft are working on this. See "OOPSLA Keynote: Concrete Languages on Virtual Platforms" at http://www.gotw.ca/ Not that I care. I'd rather use C# or Python. -Chuck -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
