What do you think of SPECS?

[rpgfan3233]

In "A Modest Proposal: C++ Resyntaxed," Ben Werther and Damian Conway
provided an altered C++ syntax; a syntax meant to be easier to
understand. You can find the paper online in HTML format [1]. If you
prefer PDF or PostScript, they are available for download from the
same Web page.

After reading it, I find it much easier to understand, though I admit
that acclimation could very well take a long time. Since it is
proposed that it make use of the same preprocessor, I believe that it
might be feasible to consider.

My question is: what do _you_ think of SPECS?

[1] - http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~damia...tProposal.html

[Jeff Schwab]

rpgfan3233 wrote:

In "A Modest Proposal: C++ Resyntaxed," Ben Werther and Damian Conway
provided an altered C++ syntax; a syntax meant to be easier to
understand. You can find the paper online in HTML format [1]. If you
prefer PDF or PostScript, they are available for download from the
same Web page.

After reading it, I find it much easier to understand, though I admit
that acclimation could very well take a long time. Since it is
proposed that it make use of the same preprocessor, I believe that it
might be feasible to consider.

My question is: what do _you_ think of SPECS?

[1] - http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~damia...tProposal.html

It looks like it's based on an ancient draft standard of C++. Is that
correct? How does it correlate with the current and upcoming standards?
What is the plan for maintaining consistent mappinsg between this
altered syntax and the traditional syntax?

[Ivan Vecerina]

"rpgfan3233" <rp********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:bf**********************************@8g2000hs u.googlegroups.com...
: In "A Modest Proposal: C++ Resyntaxed," Ben Werther and Damian Conway
: provided an altered C++ syntax; a syntax meant to be easier to
: understand. You can find the paper online in HTML format [1]. If you
: prefer PDF or PostScript, they are available for download from the
: same Web page.
:
: After reading it, I find it much easier to understand, though I admit
: that acclimation could very well take a long time. Since it is
: proposed that it make use of the same preprocessor, I believe that it
: might be feasible to consider.
:
: My question is: what do _you_ think of SPECS?
:
: [1] -
http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~damia...tProposal.html

It had been discussed around here (and on .moderated) at the time.
The key issue is that the cost/benefit of the change is not favorable.

Yes, the idiosyncrasies of the C/C++ syntax is somewhat of a barrier
to entry, but it is pretty minor in comparison to other complexities.

Also, nowadays, many new developers are taught programming using
Java or Python (not Pascal as used to be the case), so they might
actually be less familiar with the SPECS syntax than with the
current/native one.
--
http://ivan.vecerina.com/contact/?subject=NG_POST <- email contact form
Brainbench MVP for C++ <http://www.brainbench.com