Re: C and C-style C++
Stroustrup has always been a blowhard, for me his ship sank almost 20 years ago.
I disagree with Stroustrup on a number of points. I've argued with him in public, on Usenet. I'm certainly not an unalloyed fan of C++.1
But your comment is small-minded and foolish. Stroustrup has made many excellent contributions to computing, a good portion of which have nothing to do with C++, such as his essay (written while Chair of CS at Texas A&M) deploring the resistance to programming among academic computer scientists.
The article links to his papers on the history of C++ and programming languages in general, which are a good example of Stroustrup as an academic. I'd like you to point out where in them he's being a "blowhard".
1A decent, fairly clean language, hidden under a huge mound of ugly and unintuitive syntax, grievous legacy features, unfortunate complications, and obvious failings (some of which S. mentions in the article) which have yet to be remedied; most frequently seen in fevered visions after looking at far too much extant C++ code, which is nearly always execrable.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
