C++ (was RE: Python suitability)

[Boudewijn Rempt]

Alex Martelli <Alex.Martelli at think3.com> wrote:
> Grant writes:

>> About twice as long as it would take for a Modula-3 or
>> Smalltalk programmer.  ;) I've never thought C++ was a
>> particularly decent example of an object-oriented language, but
>> maybe that's because I learned Smalltalk and M3 first.
>> 
>> The whole virtual-function-method thing has always struck me as
>> very obtuse.  You apparently have to guess ahead of time which
>> methods somebody might, at some point in the future, want to
>> override, and declare them differently from the non-overridable
>> ones...
>> 
> Or, to put it another way: you have to DESIGN, rather than
> just start hacking.

> Specifically, if you follow the advice of Scott Meyers, in his
> excellent "Effective C++" (CD Edition): never inherit from a
> concrete class.

That makes C++ about as powerful as Visual Basic - in essence,
no inheritance at all, just interfaces... Having just done a
large project in Visual Basic, I've learnt how painfult that
limitation can be - and I was kind of surprised when I read
in Design Patterns that composition should be favoured over
inheritance. There are no doubt good reasons, but not one
I can think of.

Boudewijn Rempt  | http://denden.conlang.org