“Defining OO as based on the use of class hierarchies and virtual functions is also practical in that it provides some guidance as to where OO is likely to be successful.”

Always think about how a piece of code should be used: good interfaces are the essence of good code.

Creativity, engineering principles, and evolutionary change are needed to create a satisfactory large system.

Personally, I look forward to better tools for analyzing C++ source code.

To many managers, getting rid of the arrogant, undisciplined, over-paid, technology-obsessed, improperly-dressed etc. programmers would appear to be a significant added benefit

It is easy to study the rules of overloading and of templates without noticing that together they are one of the keys to elegant and efficient type-safe containers.

C++ is my favorite garbage collected language because it generates so little garbage

C++ is designed to allow you to express ideas, but if you don’t have ideas or don’t have any clue about how to express them, C++ doesn’t offer much help.

Most of the programmers in ten years will be us, and we won’t get much smarter.

This evolution may compromise Java’s claim of being simpler than C++, but my guess is that the effort will make Java a better language than it is today.

Java isn’t platform independent; it is a platform

I assume that a sufficiently skilled will be able to do anything not explicitly forbidden by the hardware.

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.

I would encourage nonproprietary standards for tools and libraries.

I find languages that support just one programming paradigm constraining

Other programming languages constitute a mountain of ideas and inspiration-but it has to be mined carefully to avoid featurism and inconsistencies.

Our civilization depends critically on software, and we have a dangerously low degree of professionalism in the computer fields