4 ms·
It might have been understandable in 1995, because by then C++ already was mind-boggingly complex for a lot of applications, and it might not have been entirely
by golergka 4y ago
It might have been understandable in 1995, because by then C++ already was mind-boggingly complex for a lot of applications, and it might not have been entirely clear which of it's features were the worst in that regard. But I was only starting programming with QBasic in 1995, so this is just a thought, not a fact.
- jeremyjh 4y agoI think there were already much better models to follow than C++, in ML for example.
- Jtsummers 4y agoAda generics are easy to understand and were at least publicly known for ~12 years in 1995 (going by the publication date of the first Ada standard, older if we go to drafts and discussions prior to that standard's release). Generics aren't hard to use, and they aren't novel. That there's any debate nearly 40 years after at least one major procedural language introduced them is mind-boggling to me.
- johnisgood 4y agoPeople really ought to look into Ada more. The language has a pretty neat type system (ranges are neat!), and it even has proper language constructs to do concurrent programming in it (had it for quite a while!). FWIW, search for "generic" here: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Style_Guide/Concurrency https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Style_Guide/Concurrency