On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 19:00:11 +0200, MJM wrote: > I learned last night that there is a 3rd Ed. Evidently things have > changed and the complex language has gotten more complex -
Right. > trying to be all things to all people. If this continues, C++ will be > too complex for normal programmers. C++ is a complex beast, and it has always been. However, much of that complexity was introduced to remain compatible with C. You should like that? > C++ should be backwards compatible, so I think my 2nd Ed. suits my > needs. C++ was finalized in 1998. There was nothing to be compatible to before that date. Not even C++ 2nd. Ed. from 1991 (?), even if that book was written by a thousand Stroustrups. Yes, I know what you will answer - standards are for language experts, not for the programmers. REAL programmers don't care. They continue to apply their C patterns which served them well for years. They are the _real_ gurus as opposed to that C++ dimwits. Stop being childish. Even C has changed in the past, and will continue to do so. > I use C++ features for templates, encapsulation, STL, inheritance (not > much), and "objectification". I do low level stuff, so I want to use > the C capabilites. If the C capabilities are removed from future > versions of C++, then I will recode for C. You obviously don't understand the point of the new cast operators. They don't take power away from you, in fact they give you more power than before. -- Best Regards, | Hi! I'm a .signature virus. Copy me into Sebastian | your ~/.signature to help me spread! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
