Python is just as good as C++ for real apps

[Jason Orendorff]

Greg Weeks wrote:
> In C programming, given some particular conceptual data type, you will
> often find in the code both a structure type and a 
> pointer-to-structure type.  As you read the code, you will find
> the pointer-to-structure type actually being used.  The *only* need
> for the structure type is to allocate objects on the execution stack
> rather than on the heap.

That's not true.  The structure type is also used in arrays and in
other structures, whether on the stack or not.

> Bjarne could not forego that one performance optimization.
> (C++ had to be as fast as C.)  Consequently C++ has the complexity
> having of two types where conceptually only one is needed.

I think this is, at least, a misunderstanding of Bjarne Stroustrup's
point of view.  Stroustrup sees support for "concrete types" - that is,
classes with value semantics, not intended to be subclassed - as an
important feature of C++.  In the 3rd edition of TC++PL he talks
about them in some detail.

## Jason Orendorff    http://www.jorendorff.com/