Re: C++

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
after C.

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?
> Derek
> --
>          To unsubscribe: mail with
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]