I recently saw a serious suggestion that we rename this magazine The C++ Users Journal. Presumably, the new name would signal a new departure in editorial content. We would dramatically increase our coverage of C++ and related topics. We would at the same time ramp down our coverage of all that old-fashioned C stuff.My immediate reaction was — not this year. There seem to be a few of you left out there who are not yet ready to leave C behind for more object-oriented pastures. The submissions we get of articles for publication also show that C is still a powerful springboard for innovation. I, myself, am not yet ready to make the switch once and for all.
Please understand, I think C++ is an important topic. We try to run at least one article in each issue on C++. Many of these tend to be tutorial — there's a lot of new stuff to learn besides new keywords and syntax. I believe that CUJ has an obligation to show C programmers any new developments related to the C language. C++ certainly fits in that category.
Still, I don't want us to get stampeded. People who report the news can't help but paint a distorted picture of reality. The emphasis is perforce on what is out of the ordinary, what is new and different. As Walter Cronkite once observed, you can't report on all the cats that didn't go astray on a given day.
Were you to judge the state of the art by counting magazine articles and talks at conferences, the conclusion would be inescapable. Object-oriented stuff is in. Whatever went before is out. C programmers have joined COBOL and assembly language afficionadoes in the bread lines.
The observable facts are quite different. C has become the language of choice for programmers of all sorts. Professionals write in C for micros and mainframes, applications and operating systems, process control and payroll production. C is also preferred by many amateurs and hobbyists for games, music, graphics, and whatnot. Now is the time to broaden and deepen the pool of knowledge shared by C programmers. We don't need to start over at square one.
If C++ is truly as revolutionary as its proponents claim, you'll see that reflected in the pages of this magazine. We will report on techniques and resources in C++ as they become available, and as writers learn how to describe them clearly. Perhaps one day, Robert Ward may even elect to change the name of the magazine as suggested. That's not a recommendation I intend to make this year, however.
P.J. Plauger
pjp@plauger.uunet.com