🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <jls.670284598@rutabaga> jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) writes:
>>Any typing error that would be trapped in a staticly typed language
>>can be captured in a dynamically typed languages using dataflow
>>analysis.
>
>But now you need an additional tool besides an editor, compiler, linker,
>debugger. And what makes you think the programmer will always remember
>to USE the dataflow analyzer? What if he/she is in a hurry? (Oh, right,
>programmers NEVER cut corners to meet schedules...) The idea of the
>"simple language aided and abetted with other tools" has been tried
>with lint for C, with predictable results. You'll note that there is
>no need for lint++ with C++, precisely because the C++ compiler does
>the work instead. This is progress.

Do people on this group totally lack any knowledge of compilers?

Dataflow analysis is a function of the compiler. It's primarily
an optimization technique that also happens to have quite a few
other uses.

A dataflow analyzer would not be a separate tool. Frankly, an optimizing
compiler that isn't already doing dataflow is a rather miserable compiler.

And the statement "This is progress" applied to C++ seems to be a rather
poor joke. There's damned little about C++ that could be called "progress".

Honestly, what (besides multiple inheritance) is in C++ that wasn't in 
Simula? The only difference is that the C++ is even uglier. (Sorry, but
I find C++ to be the ugliest, cruftiest, most primitive excuse for an 
object-oriented language that I can imagine.)

	<MC>



-- 
---------------------- Mark Craig Carroll:  <MC> ------------------------
------ U of Del. Grad Student in CIS ------ EE/CIS LabStaff Hacker ------
-- Resident Wierdo @ 105 E Cleveland Ave, Newark DE - carroll@udel.edu --
---------------------- Shalom Achshav - Peace NOW! ----------------------