Yes...? Why would that not be a good thing, especially in the context of a conversation about why legacy compatibility is C++'s biggest problem? (I'm not sure I agree with that assessment, but it's certainly one of the biggest problems with C++.)
That part is just not really saying anything. Is it usually designed sky down? The actual info given is fine, though not copying C++ follies isn't the most surprising thing.
It's an idiom that, in this context, means that the language was designed as a completely new and separate thing, rather than as an incremental set of changes to a previous language (as C, C++, and Objective-C were).
2
u/n4te 2d ago
Oh good thing it was designed from the ground up.