LANDON@ENR.Prime.COM (08/25/89)
/* Written 4:24 pm Aug 24, 1989 by jonnyg@umd5.UUCP in ENR:comp.windows.ms */ /* ---------- "C_Talk review and final review if C" ---------- */ >First of all I finished reviewing CommonView C++. I found it to >be mostly broken. You better come clean, because this statement has no credibility. I've been working with CommonView since its release, and while I've had my frustrations, it's been due to "user error" in most cases. There are bugs but they are being nailed expeditiously. You need to tell the net what your review consisted of and define what you mean by mostly broken. I haven't found this to be the case at all. Specify what release you have since they've already supplied an improved update. >The class library is realy bad Compared to what? SmallTalk? Give it a break - it's a new product and has growing pains like anything else. Glockenspiel is cranking and has been diligent in updates. Just the help CommonView is to memory management under Windows is worth the price of the package. >and the examples won't hold water. Your statements don't hold water when you don't back them up. Tell the net exactly what you are talking about and maybe your statements will hold water. >I saw a lot of promises in the read.me's that say so much will >happen in such a short time that I beleive none of it will happen. Glockenspiel has their work cut out for them, but their efforts can only help us as developers, so why the nay-say? Time will tell - what you believe at this point won't slow them down or speed them up. >Now that I fully understand C++ I feel C++ is to OOPS as COBOL is to >stuctured programming! C++ may be an OOPS but it is not a very good one. Since you fully understand C++ I'm sure Bjarne could use some help as could many of the contributors to comp.lang.c++. Your myopic view of C++ will cost your employer dearly. For being such an impotent OOP language it sure has a lot of you guys scared.