On 2010-08-02, Aahz <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Peter <[email protected]> wrote:
>>On Aug 3, 7:42=A0am, Mark Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 02/08/2010 00:08, candide wrote:
>>>
>>> I can't understand why any serious programmer mentions C++. As soon
>>> as I read it, I have to rush either to the kitchen to find a bowl to
>>> throw up in, or head for the toilet so I can talk to the great white
>>> telephone.
>>
>>With you there Mark - IMO C++ is an abortion that should never have
>>seen the light of day. The idea of experimenting with creating an OO
>>language by extending C wasn't such a bad idea for a "play thing" (by
>>Stroustrop) but the fact that it somehow escaped from the Lab and
>>people picked it up and ran with it on a commercial basis is just
>>plain wrong!
>
> http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/98/May/stroustrup.html
It's funny (and sad) because it's so close to being true.
(The effect, I mean, not necissarly the intent.)
There's no computing problem so simple that it can't be solved in a
complex and obtuse manner in C++.
I know that's true of any language, but from what I've seen over the
years, it "more true" in C++.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Should I get locked
at in the PRINCICAL'S
gmail.com OFFICE today -- or have
a VASECTOMY??
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
