"Phlip" <ph*******@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<8c******************@newssvr33.news.prodigy. com>...
[ ... ]
Notice Ioannis is saying that C++ was deployed to business users before all
its logical inconsistencies were removed. These tend to shock newbies who
think that a language designer must be somehow infallible.
Regardless of the method by which it was developed, I've yet to see a
single language from which all logical inconsistencies had been
removed, or which lacked "features" that could surprise newbies. In
the end, language designers are human, and the languages they design
reflect that.
OTOH, I'd keep in mind that a language is basically a specification
for some software. Most current thought on specs for software seems to
emphasize collecting information from real users on a regular and
ongoing basis throughout the design process, and IMO, a language is no
different. If anything, I'd say that languages generally suffer more
from language designers who are too close to infallible. They design
languages that work well for their aims, but they're enough different
from the average programmer that they often design things that average
programmers can barely understand, not to mention really use.
--
Later,
Jerry.
The universe is a figment of its own imagination.