The Real IEEE Interview
Bjarne Stroustrup
A hoax pretending to be an interview with me by IEEE Computer from
January 1, 1998 has been doing the rounds. Over the last four months
or so, it was posted and re-posted in an incredible number of places.
In it, I'm quoted as making strong derogatory statements about C++ and
object-oriented programming. The opinions expressed that fake interview
are contrary to anything I have ever said about C++ and completely in
variance with a professional attitude.
However, now IEEE has done an interview with me for the June issue of
Computer Magazine. That real interview can be found at
http://www.research.att.com/~bs/ieee_interview.html, and
http://www.computer.org/computer/co1998/html/r6110.htm
I suggest that people who helped spred the hoax apply a similar
amount of energy on spreading the genuine article (sic).
I have posted this message to a few newsgroups where I found copies of
the hoax and that are not devoted to jokes.
I have on occation expressed the opinion that the fake interview was
less funny than it could have been. Predictably, someone suggested that
I write something better in the line of "geek humor" for April 1.
Have a look at
http://www.research.att.com/~bs/whitespace98.pdf
from the English C++ Users' Group magazine "Overload" - April 98 issue
of course. It differes from the fake interview in many ways, not least
in that this article doesn't say or imply anything negative about anyone
or anyone's work.
- Bjarne
Bjarne Stroustrup, AT&T Labs, http://www.research.att.com/~bs
firewind
On Sat, 30 May 1998, Bjarne Stroustrup wrote:
> A hoax pretending to be an interview with me by IEEE Computer from
> January 1, 1998 has been doing the rounds. Over the last four months
> or so, it was posted and re-posted in an incredible number of places.
[...]
> However, now IEEE has done an interview with me for the June issue of
> Computer Magazine. That real interview can be found at
[...]
> I have posted this message to a few newsgroups where I found copies of
> the hoax and that are not devoted to jokes.
It's good that you recognized that the original piece of garbage that made
ill of you and your achievements was both tasteless and off-topic for this
newsgroup; however, I am saddened to see that you seem to think the real thing
would be different. While, I am sure, many readers of this newsgroup will be
very interested by this interview, it is still off-topic and still an
unwelcome subject for discussion in comp.lang.c. Please keep this in mind in
future posts to this newsgroup.
--
(initiator of the campaign for grumpiness where grumpiness is due in c.l.c)
Craig Franck
firewind <fire...@metroid.ml.org> wrote:
>On Sat, 30 May 1998, Bjarne Stroustrup wrote:
>
>> A hoax pretending to be an interview with me by IEEE Computer from
>> January 1, 1998 has been doing the rounds. Over the last four months
>> or so, it was posted and re-posted in an incredible number of places.
>
>[...]
>
>> However, now IEEE has done an interview with me for the June issue of
>> Computer Magazine. That real interview can be found at
>
>[...]
>
>> I have posted this message to a few newsgroups where I found copies of
>> the hoax and that are not devoted to jokes.
>
>It's good that you recognized that the original piece of garbage that made
>ill of you and your achievements was both tasteless and off-topic for this
>newsgroup; however, I am saddened to see that you seem to think the real thing
>would be different.
Oh, come on. A person is allowed to defend himself against bogus
posts!
--
Craig
clfr...@worldnet.att.net
Manchester, NH
If you have enough spiritual power to levitate a car, what
difference does it make what religion you call yourself?
-- "Stella"
firewind
On 30 May 1998, Craig Franck wrote:
> Oh, come on. A person is allowed to defend himself against bogus
> posts!
Of course; defense is one thing (and has already been provided many times
over for each posting of the obviously ficticious interview), but blatant
self-advertising is quite another.
--
(initiator of the campaign for grumpiness where grumpiness is due in c.l.c)
Attempting to write in a hybrid which can be compiled by either a C compiler
or a C++ compiler produces a compromise language which combines the drawbacks
of both with the advantages of neither.
-- John Winters <jo...@polo.demon.co.uk> in comp.lang.c
Craig Franck
firewind <fire...@metroid.ml.org> wrote:
>On 30 May 1998, Craig Franck wrote:
>
>> Oh, come on. A person is allowed to defend himself against bogus
>> posts!
>
>Of course; defense is one thing (and has already been provided many times
>over for each posting of the obviously ficticious interview), but blatant
>self-advertising is quite another.
I think the real interview has relevancy. If it were a court of
law and someone submitted fake documents, the real documents would
be relevant to the issue at hand. Presentation of the legitimate
material could serve as a rebutal.
Kaz Kylheku
On 1 Jun 1998 01:58:54 GMT, Craig Franck <clfr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>firewind <fire...@metroid.ml.org> wrote:
>>On 30 May 1998, Craig Franck wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, come on. A person is allowed to defend himself against bogus
>>> posts!
>>
>>Of course; defense is one thing (and has already been provided many times
>>over for each posting of the obviously ficticious interview), but blatant
>>self-advertising is quite another.
>
>I think the real interview has relevancy. If it were a court of
>law and someone submitted fake documents, the real documents would
>be relevant to the issue at hand. Presentation of the legitimate
>material could serve as a rebutal.
Except that the real interview took place after the fact, and the
original ``fake'' item didn't even appear in the publication in
question, and thus can't even be considered a forgery. :)
Vesa Karvonen
> > Oh, come on. A person is allowed to defend himself against bogus
> > posts!
> Of course; defense is one thing (and has already been provided many times
> over for each posting of the obviously ficticious interview), but blatant
> self-advertising is quite another.
I'm just curious. Which Stroustrup's books and/or papers have
you actually read? (Because IMHO, I haven't seen "blatant self-
advertising" by the above mentioned author.)
<--->
Vesa Karvonen
Alex...@scitex.com
In article <3572d409....@207.126.101.81>,
> >>On 30 May 1998, Craig Franck wrote:
> >>
> >>> Oh, come on. A person is allowed to defend himself against bogus
> >>> posts!
> >>
> >>Of course; defense is one thing (and has already been provided many times
> >>over for each posting of the obviously ficticious interview), but blatant
> >>self-advertising is quite another.
> >
> >law and someone submitted fake documents, the real documents would
> >be relevant to the issue at hand. Presentation of the legitimate
> >material could serve as a rebutal.
>
> Except that the real interview took place after the fact, and the
> original ``fake'' item didn't even appear in the publication in
> question, and thus can't even be considered a forgery. :)
>
Regards,
Alex Krol
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading