Ogre Forums

I had some good laughs reading this, so I thought I'd share it:
http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/c++/

and the (fake) interview with Bjarne Stroustrup:
http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/c++/I ... or_you_all

Enjoy

If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor and when was the last time you needed one?

Actually I wish C++ had a lot more functionality, like forcing every derived class to implement a particular function, for example.

Heh, yeah, nice list

@kungfoo: Could you elaborate on that, more specifically in what way pure virtual functions don't do what you just described? I'm slightly confused

Pure virtual functions only force the first derived class to implement the function. For example, if I have a "toString" function for each class, that returns the name of the class, and I want it to be a hardcoded value, not a string that can be altered or mis-used, I want every class to implement their own "toString" function.

class A;
class B : public A;
class C : public B;

I want the compiler to complain if there isn't the following:

A::toString
B::toString
C::toString

Why would a class in the middle of your hierarchy implement such a function? I'd say only concrete classes would need an implementation, but the general recommendation is to have concrete classes at the end of your hierarchy only. Concrete classes in the middle of a hierarchy mix interface and implementation which I think should be avoided.

Java is, in many ways, C++--

That's the best statement I've ever read

By the way, the interview is a well known fake ( http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#IEEE & http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6489 ... te-of-time )