Knowing me knowing you, a-ha

And here is yet another link which shows what the WinRT really is, and proves in many points how unnecessary it really is: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2011/10/20/10228473.aspx

"You will also see a few language changes that have been made to C++ to make it easier to use the WinRT"

As has been proved in an other thread: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2011/09/12/10209291.aspx?PageIndex=4 

no changes were needed to C++. This isn't true what you're saying. Stop lying. You made this WinRT syntax to suite/accomodate .Net crowd. That's the only reason.

@Jedrek głupiś jak but. Who said and where that performance is the only criteria? Oj głupiś jak but synu.

@STL As I've said beauty is very subjective and it's better not to discuss it. But as you've started I will end it.

What for you is ugly and vile for me is merely a quirk which makes me love it even more.

Just like a birthmark. Most people associate them as something unwanted but this birthmark my wife has over her upper lip is something what makes her special, beautiful, unique and one of a kind.

Some people will say that birthmarks are vile and ugly. I say they give character.

Regards

@STL Beauty is very subjective term. One likes when violins are playing and the other when he has dirty socks . To me C++ is beautiful. In every way. To you may not be but that just you and me and the way we see world (C++). There is no reason to discuss it further, those are very subjective and personal opinions.

And as for you loving C++ just about more than anyone? Bet to dissagree. You may think you do but that's just you, you cannot possibly know other people's feeling.

Regards.

P.S.

Would you mind and confirm that what you've said about not having member sort in vector and reasons for that is practically the same what I've said in my previous post?

@Ivan the reason is: code duplication, maintenance and the like. You have std::sort which already does the job, why would you want to have another sort specific to a container? That's the whole beauty of generic programming. You've got an algorithm and it works on many different containers. Exponential growth (of number of algorithms/methods/fncs) is something what you want to avoid.

C++ is beautiful in this and every other way.

@Daniel Moth: So basicaly what you're saying is that it is portable as long as windows is installed on a machine. Great...

@DeadMG: No you're wrong. Portable means portable, which means that you can port it on more than one platform and/or hardware. If one cannot do it with your code, then your code isn't portable. Maybe it has potential to be portable but at the moment isn't. God and it is me whose english isn't first language.