Re: The future of C++

From: David Eng (davideng2004_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 04/21/04


Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 15:48:29 +0000 (UTC)


Thomas Richter <thor@cleopatra.math.tu-berlin.de> wrote in message news:<c607kn$q19$2@mamenchi.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE>...
> I also feel that CORBA does its job possibly only half the way it could.
> For example, it nicely runs new threads for me serving my objects, but
> at the same time it doesn't provide necessary services for keeping
> object states consistent amongst the threads - there are no "mutex"
> specifications in CORBA.

I blame this for C++. The thread mode should be built into C++
instead of CORBA. I still cannot understand why C++ doesn't have a
standard thread library. We are moving to grid computing, yet C++
committee doesn't think it is important to standardize a thread
library. The another area bothers me is database access layer. All
these database vendors promote JDBC because there is no a standard C++
access library. If these vendors stop to support their proprietary
C++ API, who will use C++ in a distributed environment? I never head
C++ committee even has an initiative to standardize a database access
layer library. No matter how great C++ is, without a standard thread
and data access libraries, C++ will have a hard time to survive in a
distributed computing. Just to imagine how C++ can survive in a
system computing without an I/O library! If the committee thinks
proprietary libraries can do the job, I am sure that C++ will not be a
mainstream programming language; it will downgrade to a third class
language doing some limited applications.

      [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
      [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]

[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]