Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 22:57:03 +0100 From: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> To: Kenneth Culver <culverk@alpha.yumyumyum.org> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, "Steve B." <steveb99@earthlink.net>, "Eugene L. Vorokov" <vel@bugz.infotecs.ru>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: C vs C++ Message-ID: <20020305215702.GA76733@student.uu.se> In-Reply-To: <20020305164151.T5854-100000@alpha.yumyumyum.org> References: <3C8529DA.FA8ABCE@mindspring.com> <20020305164151.T5854-100000@alpha.yumyumyum.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 04:43:22PM -0500, Kenneth Culver wrote: > > Because that underlying assumption is false, and I'm making > > fun of it. > > > Well, that in itself is wrong. C++ code IS harder to write and write > correctly and effeciently, as I would assume it is for any OO language. > I'm not saying it can't be done, but generally speaking based on the Open > source and commercial products I've seen, the ones that are written in C++ > suffer from more bloat and run slower. But you don't need to write OO code just because you use C++. You can write code in C++ exactly the way you do it in C if you want. There is no advantage of C++ over C when used this way but no disadvantage either. I do agree that when the extra features of C++ are used this often results in bloated programs but this can at least in part be blamed on insufficiently skilled programmers. Note that C++ is not really an OO language. It is probably better to call it a language with support for object-oriented programming (as well as support for other programming styles.) -- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020305215702.GA76733>