Donn, More generally: One must keep in mind that advantages and disadvantages of specific implementations of language concepts are not always indications of flaws in those concepts. Real languages have real flaws from bad design choices which cause them to fall short of what those languages could achieve.
My own experience with Python and C++ is that C++ could be improved to gain it at least some of Python's advantages. After programming in Python for a while and then switching back to C++ my reaction is that C++ needs some features added to its syntax and to its RTL to make it easier to do some of the things that are much easier to do in Python. Also, a lot of C++'s flaws flow from the fact that it is old and grew in lots of increments. In my experience the overhead of explicitly deleting objects in C/C++ is not the big burden that some argue here is the biggest reason to use Python instead of C++. I find Python easier to use more for how it implements lists, dictionaries, standard libs for things like sockets, and other areas which require more work and less portability in C++. C++ needs a new standard toolbox and some new keywords to make loops and other things easier to do. Donn Cave wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > ... > > Granted, it is a pain to change type declarations. > > I see it is time for the bi-monthly reminder that C++ is not > the ideal example of strong static typing, unless you just > want to make it look bad. Cf. Hindley-Milner type inference. > > Donn Cave, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
