I come not to bury C++, but to praise it...

[John J. Lee]

"Derek" <none at none.com> writes:
[...]
> Maybe I didn't make myself clear.  I counted the ease with which
> memory can be corrupted in C++ as a minus for C++ and a plus for
> Python.  I agree with you.

No, you don't (assuming I understand Jp's post), because...


> On the flip side, C++ can catch errors immediately that Python will
> not complain about until runtime, and in this imperfect world tests
> may not catch all such errors up front.  In this respect I consider
> C++ safer.

...you made no evaluation of the relative importance of these two
qualities (memory-safety and static type-safety).  Nor of the fact
that C++ comes unavoidably packaged with the more-lines-of-code-per-
function-point anti-feature -- KIS!


John