Re: GNOME & KOM/OP

[Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com>]

On Sun, 9 Aug 1998, Leareth wrote:

> For this project, most if not all core parts are C, plain and simple. 
> Though I'm not really the athority on such things,(Don't know who is
> anymore, if anyone...) , but from what I've seen, if it's not C, it's
> not part of the core.  and I'd say that complex document support is
> kinda core stuff :-)

> 	C makes much smaller/faster code, both inherint through design, and
> 	in it's optimization, then c++, not even bringing STL's bloat to light.

It's not that you can't write bloated programs in either language, and
it's not that you can't write programs with a properly abstracted
design in either language, but it's that the amount of enforced baggage
per "amount of abstraction" in C++ is greater.

> 	C is more popular.(opinion, based on observence)

That's no reason to choose a language (and FWIW, C++ is pretty popular,
especially among those

> So in the end, Gnome may be harder to "maintain" then <Obj lang> code

Anyone who thinks that they can write unreadable, unmaintainable code just
because they're writing in C needs a reality check (I know that's not what
you were directly suggesting, but... :-)

Au contraire, C can be simpler to maintain, because it has less complexity
built into the language, so source code is for the most part only as
complicated as the coder makes it. There are examples of nice code in
GNOME, and then there is raster's code... <j/k>

-- Elliot
Do you ever just feel thankful that you know me and have access to my
dementia? Explain. Be prepared to discuss in class.