Öö Tiib said:
C++ standard is guideline for people writing C++ compilers and standard
library implementations so it has everything to do with improving that
toolset.
I am giving classes in Java and C++. I try to stay focussed,
on-topic in these classes. So I do teach what is part of the
standard ISO C++ and standard Java SE / JDK.
Teaching Java SE, I can teach how to write JavaDoc, because
this is part of the standard JDK. C++ does not have a
standard for documentation comments, although there is
Doxygen. Contracts are essential for modern programming, and
contracts of classes and functions are being described in
the documentation. So it is good when a language supports this.
Teaching Swing in Java is great as a motivation to learn
Java and OOP in Java. People want to write GUI programs and
they can see that they absolutely need to learn OOP to do
this in Java. There are not licensing issues that I am aware of.
In C++, I cannot teach GUIs because that would be off-topic
in a C++ class. A GUI does not belong to the standard C++.
Sometimes people try to teach OOP in C++ with »class cow :
public animal { public void sound(){ ::std::cout << "moe\n"
...«, but students are annoyed by such examples, possibly
they feel to be treated like children, because the topic of
animal sounds usually is treated in daycare facilities for
children. And what's the point of a shape array with
circles and rectangles, when one then cannot paint the shapes?
I myself would not mind to teach C++ in a more abstract
manner. But at least some students seem to like to see some
GUI or graphics sometimes. If C++ would have gotten a
standard interface for sockets, GUI, doc comments, XML, and
all these things 10 years ago, it would be more important
today. But instead, on TIOBE it dropped from rank 2 in 1994
to rank 3 in 2009 and now to rank 4 in 2014 (in spite of the
new 2011 standard!). This is sad, it is a wasted opportunity.
