3 ms·
I'd like to know a and b, too. But Bob's point wasn't that C++ programs look cleaner. His point was that it's very obvious that if you're not careful in C++, yo
by hugs 17y ago
I'd like to know a and b, too. But Bob's point wasn't that C++ programs look cleaner. His point was that it's very obvious that if you're not careful in C++, you can can shoot yourself in the foot quite quickly, and therefore, you're less likely to try crazy things in C++ that would risk foot injury.
- gruseom 17y agoI didn't say "look cleaner", I said "cleaner" as in not a mess, which was his point (in the sense that you describe), and it's ridiculous, an argument against higher-level languages. Of all the things one could argue killed Smalltalk's chances of becoming mainstream, this has got to be the dumbest, which is why I wonder exactly what Ward really said and in what context. A former Smalltalker I worked with for years argues that it was mostly the greed and arrogance of the vendors that ruined its chances: greed as in refusing to make even trial versions available for free, and arrogance as in refusing to make it easier to integrate with other systems. Edit: This, by the way, was the perspective of a guy who was simply reflecting on what he had observed, not someone with a software ideology to push... as opposed to Bob Martin, who seems to be saying "Smalltalk got killed so we should all write lots and lots of tests".