- From: raj dutt <rdutt voxel net>
- To: Derek Simkowiak <dereks animal blarg net>
- CC: Preston Brown <pbrown econ yale edu>, Miguel de Icaza <miguel nuclecu unam mx>, gnome-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: C++
- Date: Tue, 03 Feb 1998 04:50:05 +0800
it might also be interesting for some to note that the c++ compiler/parser on
most unices (including gcc/linux) is normally severely -retarded- compared to
their C counterparts.
Most of the Windows world is using c++ ; they see it as a natural next step
The Unix world however, has been very hesistant in adopting C++. This
difference in attitudes can probably be partially attributed to the
"efficiency reigns supreme" attitude of Unix coders who will not sacrifice
speed for a little more OO functionality.
I don't really think that (for c++ coders), the issue of C++ bindings instead
of normal C for GUI/Widgets should be that big a factor. OO code might be
easier to debug and in some cases follow, but it is not neccessarily easier to
write in (imnsho)
Derek Simkowiak wrote:
> > The thing that C cannot duplicate that C++ has, as well as smalltalk,
> > Objective-C, and other OO languages, is the simplicity and elegance of
> > object oriented design, particularly inheritance.
> The elegence is the really the core of it, I believe. My question
> is, why have people been using C++ instead of Objective-C?
> To unsubscribe: mail firstname.lastname@example.org with
> "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
] [Thread Prev