Walter wrote:
> 
> D stands on the shoulders of giants, and one of those giants is Bjarne
> Stroustrup. Bjarne has made huge contributions to the programming community.
> C++ was a great leap forward, and it practically invented generic
> metaprogramming.

And don't forget Alexander Stepanov.  C++ may not have existed without Bjarne, but generics may not have existed without Alexander.  For the uninitiated, there's a good interview here:

http://www.stlport.org/resources/StepanovUSA.html

> C++ isn't going away in the forseeable future. I fully expect that future
> C++ standards will incorporate some of D's innovations, in an analogous way
> that C has adopted some C++ innovations. Bjarne is right, though, in
> suggesting that this will not happen anytime soon. The C++ standardization
> process is agonizingly slow (and should be, for a mature language).

Of course.  The C++ community would go nuts if the language changed too quickly.  But the language's stability is one of the reasons I favor it over the latest greatest whatever.  That's both the blessing and the curse of backwards compatibility.

> And, in due course, D will eventually be run over by a new upstart, D++ <g>.

Certainly.  But before then I hope that D will have contributed some new ideas and techniques to the programming world.  Otherwise, why are we here? :)


Sean

"Sean Kelly" <sean@ffwd.cx> wrote in message news:c8iq5m$1au5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Walter wrote:
> >
> > D stands on the shoulders of giants, and one of those giants is Bjarne Stroustrup. Bjarne has made huge contributions to the programming
community.
> > C++ was a great leap forward, and it practically invented generic metaprogramming.
>
> And don't forget Alexander Stepanov.  C++ may not have existed without Bjarne, but generics may not have existed without Alexander.  For the uninitiated, there's a good interview here:
>
> http://www.stlport.org/resources/StepanovUSA.html

Yes, you're right. And Bjarne deserves the credit for understanding Stepanov's work and endorsing/incorporating it, when it would have been easy to ignore it.


> > C++ isn't going away in the forseeable future. I fully expect that
future
> > C++ standards will incorporate some of D's innovations, in an analogous
way
> > that C has adopted some C++ innovations. Bjarne is right, though, in suggesting that this will not happen anytime soon. The C++
standardization
> > process is agonizingly slow (and should be, for a mature language).
>
> Of course.  The C++ community would go nuts if the language changed too quickly.  But the language's stability is one of the reasons I favor it over the latest greatest whatever.  That's both the blessing and the curse of backwards compatibility.
>
> > And, in due course, D will eventually be run over by a new upstart, D++
<g>.
>
> Certainly.  But before then I hope that D will have contributed some new ideas and techniques to the programming world.  Otherwise, why are we here? :)

Yes, indeed.

"Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:c8e2mb$2h8v$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar@b-online.gr> wrote in message news:c8dojk$2048$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:c8bjdv$1eun$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > Someday, C++ may catch up with D <g>.
> > I send an e-mail to Bjarne Stroustrup regarding the future of C++ now
that
> D
> > is around the corner. He told me to leave him alone and go use D, and
that
> > C++ is not gonna change anytime soon (although he said it very
politely).
> >
> > I guess some people never realize when their time is over.
>
> D stands on the shoulders of giants, and one of those giants is Bjarne Stroustrup. Bjarne has made huge contributions to the programming
community.
> C++ was a great leap forward, and it practically invented generic metaprogramming.
>
> C++ isn't going away in the forseeable future. I fully expect that future C++ standards will incorporate some of D's innovations, in an analogous
way
> that C has adopted some C++ innovations. Bjarne is right, though, in suggesting that this will not happen anytime soon. The C++ standardization process is agonizingly slow (and should be, for a mature language).
>
> And, in due course, D will eventually be run over by a new upstart, D++
<g>.
>
>

But why is it such a slow process ? I myself can work for a couple of hours and produce a better C++ spec...how come these people need years to do so ?

I think some people are overhyped. With all due respect to mr Stroustrup, if he can't see that C++ has major flaws that need to be fixed *yesterday*, what can I say ? Let Java dominate, then.

"Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar@b-online.gr> wrote in message news:c8nmek$u31$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:c8e2mb$2h8v$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >
> > "Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar@b-online.gr> wrote in message news:c8dojk$2048$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:c8bjdv$1eun$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > > Someday, C++ may catch up with D <g>.
> > > I send an e-mail to Bjarne Stroustrup regarding the future of C++ now
> that
> > D
> > > is around the corner. He told me to leave him alone and go use D, and
> that
> > > C++ is not gonna change anytime soon (although he said it very
> politely).
> > >
> > > I guess some people never realize when their time is over.
> >
> > D stands on the shoulders of giants, and one of those giants is Bjarne Stroustrup. Bjarne has made huge contributions to the programming
> community.
> > C++ was a great leap forward, and it practically invented generic metaprogramming.
> >
> > C++ isn't going away in the forseeable future. I fully expect that future C++ standards will incorporate some of D's innovations, in an analogous
> way
> > that C has adopted some C++ innovations. Bjarne is right, though, in suggesting that this will not happen anytime soon. The C++ standardization process is agonizingly slow (and should be, for a mature language).
> >
> > And, in due course, D will eventually be run over by a new upstart, D++
> <g>.
> >
> >
>
> But why is it such a slow process ? I myself can work for a couple of hours and produce a better C++ spec...how come these people need years to do so ?

Wow!

Arrogance, coupled with  ...

> I think some people are overhyped. With all due respect to mr Stroustrup, if

... ignorance (it's Dr Stroustrup)

> he can't see that C++ has major flaws that need to be fixed *yesterday*, what can I say ? Let Java dominate, then.

... and stupidity.

What a package!

"Matthew" <matthew.hat@stlsoft.dot.org> wrote in message news:c8ns6g$1697$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar@b-online.gr> wrote in message news:c8nmek$u31$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >
> > "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:c8e2mb$2h8v$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > >
> > > "Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar@b-online.gr> wrote in message news:c8dojk$2048$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > > "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:c8bjdv$1eun$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > > > Someday, C++ may catch up with D <g>.
> > > > I send an e-mail to Bjarne Stroustrup regarding the future of C++
now
> > that
> > > D
> > > > is around the corner. He told me to leave him alone and go use D,
and
> > that
> > > > C++ is not gonna change anytime soon (although he said it very
> > politely).
> > > >
> > > > I guess some people never realize when their time is over.
> > >
> > > D stands on the shoulders of giants, and one of those giants is Bjarne Stroustrup. Bjarne has made huge contributions to the programming
> > community.
> > > C++ was a great leap forward, and it practically invented generic metaprogramming.
> > >
> > > C++ isn't going away in the forseeable future. I fully expect that
future
> > > C++ standards will incorporate some of D's innovations, in an
analogous
> > way
> > > that C has adopted some C++ innovations. Bjarne is right, though, in suggesting that this will not happen anytime soon. The C++
standardization
> > > process is agonizingly slow (and should be, for a mature language).
> > >
> > > And, in due course, D will eventually be run over by a new upstart,
D++
> > <g>.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > But why is it such a slow process ? I myself can work for a couple of
hours
> > and produce a better C++ spec...how come these people need years to do
so ?
>
> Wow!
>
> Arrogance, coupled with  ...
>
> > I think some people are overhyped. With all due respect to mr
Stroustrup, if
>
> ... ignorance (it's Dr Stroustrup)
>
> > he can't see that C++ has major flaws that need to be fixed *yesterday*, what can I say ? Let Java dominate, then.
>
> ... and stupidity.
>
> What a package!
>
Mathew I think you forgot to mention the other feature of the package, it was wrapped in Bull S**t

"Phill" <phill@pacific.net.au> wrote in message news:c8pimj$hve$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Matthew" <matthew.hat@stlsoft.dot.org> wrote in message news:c8ns6g$1697$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >
> > "Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar@b-online.gr> wrote in message news:c8nmek$u31$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > >
> > > "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:c8e2mb$2h8v$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > >
> > > > "Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar@b-online.gr> wrote in message news:c8dojk$2048$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > > > "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:c8bjdv$1eun$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > > > > > Someday, C++ may catch up with D <g>.
> > > > > I send an e-mail to Bjarne Stroustrup regarding the future of C++
> now
> > > that
> > > > D
> > > > > is around the corner. He told me to leave him alone and go use D,
> and
> > > that
> > > > > C++ is not gonna change anytime soon (although he said it very
> > > politely).
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess some people never realize when their time is over.
> > > >
> > > > D stands on the shoulders of giants, and one of those giants is Bjarne Stroustrup. Bjarne has made huge contributions to the programming
> > > community.
> > > > C++ was a great leap forward, and it practically invented generic metaprogramming.
> > > >
> > > > C++ isn't going away in the forseeable future. I fully expect that
> future
> > > > C++ standards will incorporate some of D's innovations, in an
> analogous
> > > way
> > > > that C has adopted some C++ innovations. Bjarne is right, though, in suggesting that this will not happen anytime soon. The C++
> standardization
> > > > process is agonizingly slow (and should be, for a mature language).
> > > >
> > > > And, in due course, D will eventually be run over by a new upstart,
> D++
> > > <g>.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > But why is it such a slow process ? I myself can work for a couple of
> hours
> > > and produce a better C++ spec...how come these people need years to do
> so ?
> >
> > Wow!
> >
> > Arrogance, coupled with  ...
> >
> > > I think some people are overhyped. With all due respect to mr
> Stroustrup, if
> >
> > ... ignorance (it's Dr Stroustrup)
> >
> > > he can't see that C++ has major flaws that need to be fixed *yesterday*, what can I say ? Let Java dominate, then.
> >
> > ... and stupidity.
> >
> > What a package!
> >
> Mathew I think you forgot to mention the other feature of the package, it was wrapped in Bull S**t

Well, maybe I came off a bit strong, but I fail to see how such disrespect should be tolerated.

Technically Bjarne Stroustrup is a very smart man. Moreover, he is an exceedingly foresightful man - just check my latest article in this month's CUJ in June, which describes a new technique for dramatically improving the performance of string concatenation in any C++ libraries in a thoroughly safe and non-intrusive manner. This was inspired by some research I was doing for the book on another matter - user-defined cast operators (Imperfect C++, Chapter 19, if you're interested) - that caused me to read a certain part of The C++ Programming Language. That was an unconscious bit of smarts on the part of Dr Stroustrup. As for a conscious one, he told me that he did indeed foresee the merging of template and C++ cast syntax, in smart casts.

Furthermore, he's a very responsive man, and invariably helpful (even if he's necessarily terse). I have had occasion to have information and encouragement from him throughout the last year or so wrt my preparation of Imperfect C++, and I can tell you he's a very nice, genuine, fellow. Given that he could potentially be receiving emails from the 3-5 million C++ programmers in the world, that's pretty good work.

A bit more respect for those whose shoulders we stand upon costs nothing, and shouldn't hurt anyone's ego. Maybe when AM has invented a language that is used to implement a significant proportion of the worlds operating systems, and the software that runs on it, I'll pay more credence to his invective.

-- 
Matthew Wilson

Author: "Imperfect C++", Addison-Wesley, 2004
    (www.imperfectcplusplus.com)
Contributing editor, C/C++ Users Journal
    (www.synesis.com.au/articles.html#columns)
STLSoft moderator
    (http://www.stlsoft.org)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"So far, C++ is the best language I've discovered to say what I want to say" -- Alex Stepanov

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> A bit more respect for those whose shoulders we stand upon costs nothing,
and
> shouldn't hurt anyone's ego. Maybe when AM has invented a language that is
used
> to implement a significant proportion of the worlds operating systems, and
the
> software that runs on it, I'll pay more credence to his invective.
>

I agree, and i'd certainly love to see the C++ spec's that he(AM) can come up with in a "couple of hours" work.

"Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar@b-online.gr> wrote in message news:c8nmek$u31$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:c8e2mb$2h8v$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > The C++ standardization
> > process is agonizingly slow (and should be, for a mature language).
> But why is it such a slow process ?

Committees always are. The C++ standards committee is composed of people all over the world, and there's a formal process to go through to make any changes. It's set up to try and produce consensus, and that takes time. Lots of people need to look at it, get to comment, there are public reviews, etc. It's all there to try and ensure any changes are really needed and won't break entrenched existing code.

> I myself can work for a couple of hours
> and produce a better C++ spec...how come these people need years to do so
?

Writing specs is pretty hard. It's further complicated by everything in C++ seems to affect everything else :-( When designing a new feature, it's very difficult to anticipate everything else it will perturb.

> I think some people are overhyped.

I've known Dr. Stroustrup since 1988 or so, and he's the genuine article.

> With all due respect to mr Stroustrup, if
> he can't see that C++ has major flaws that need to be fixed *yesterday*,
> what can I say ? Let Java dominate, then.

I'm sure he's well aware of the flaws in C++. The problem is, the flaws are due to the desire for backwards compatibility with legacy code. There's nothing to be done about it, short of making a break with backwards compatibility like D does.

>I'm sure he's well aware of the flaws in C++. The problem is, the flaws are due to the desire for backwards compatibility with legacy code. There's nothing to be done about it, short of making a break with backwards compatibility like D does.

D needs to break backward compatibility more (or however to express that in
proper English grammar).

Juan C wrote:

>>I'm sure he's well aware of the flaws in C++. The problem is, the flaws are due to the desire for backwards compatibility with legacy code. There's nothing to be done about it, short of making a break with backwards compatibility like D does.
> 
> D needs to break backward compatibility more (or however to express that
> in proper English grammar).

Do you talk about details or fundamental concepts?

As I understand it the idea behind D is to give up compatibility in terms of code, but not in terms of programming philosophy. A C/C++ programmer will have to relearn details, but the core concepts (what is a class, what is a function, etc.) are kept the same.

I think, this is a great goal. No good programmer should have a problem learning a new syntax or adjusting to new language details, but changing your way of thinking is extremely hard once you got comfortable in one language.