Re: object-oriented C programming
David Greene wrote:
>
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Philip Brown wrote:
>
> > >
> > > No argument here, but why _wouldn't_ one use an OO language for such
> > > designs? That's what they're there for!
> >
> > a) limited hardware/OS
>
> That's exactly what C++ is designed for! The zero-overhead rule makes
> sure this isn't a problem. Believe me, C++ is not, not, not slow,
> and memory is not an issue. In fact, C++ and the standard libraries
> sometimes run _faster_ than C (compare qsort and std::sort). Even Java
> does pretty well these days with HotSpot and its ilk.
>
So few people who understand the design behind C++!!! The only limiting
factor for C++ has traditionally been the poor implementations. But
I can say that nearly 2 years after the standard has been finalized
both g++ and visual c++ compilers have been quite conformant implementations.
The time of C++ hacking has arrived!
C++ programs will run faster than C if properly used. Take a look at
blitz++ (as my traditional example), and look at the libstdc++-3 source
code ;) Don't forget comparing the source code sizes, too. ;) Use the
standard library.
Memory management is one of the things C++ is _much_ better than _any_
C thing.
Telling all these (and more) in linux development list was more difficult
of course ;)
--
Eray (exa) Ozkural
Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara
e-mail: erayo@cs.bilkent.edu.tr
www: http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~erayo
Reply to: