Re: Other programming languages (Was: Command line globber/tokenizer library for C?)

On 13.09.2024 00:32, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 12 Sep 2024 17:40:17 +0200, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
 

A lot of early C++ programs I've seen were just, umm, "enhanced" "C"
programs.

 
Given that C++ makes “virtual” optional instead of standard behaviour, I’d
say that C++ is in fact designed to be used that way.

There's different semantics with and without a 'virtual' specification.

Even if you want polymorphism (and have to use 'virtual') there's no
need to define it as _default_ (and "disable" it where unnecessary).
A language designer is free to have it explicitly specified for that.
Given that C++ has its paragon in Simula it's not surprising that it
has been defined in a similar way; to explicitly declare it virtual.

(Other OO languages may have that differently designed. But I won't
engage in any "real" OO languages have 'virtual' defined as default
sort of discussions. - It is fine for me as it is in Simula or C++.
If you want to program in OO paradigm just specify 'virtual'.[*])

Janis

[*] Note: The Simula compiler I use nowadays is Cim. And Cim has a
serious bug where specifying 'virtual' does not work as specified;
it's actually ineffective. I discovered an alternative non-standard
syntax specification that makes polymorphism work in Cim. (Search
the Web/Usenet or just ask or mail me if interested in the details.)