Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 22:41:56 +0000 From: Daniela <dgw@liwest.at> To: Kai Grossjohann <kai@emptydomain.de>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Beginning C++ in FreeBSD Message-ID: <200404162241.56535.dgw@liwest.at> In-Reply-To: <87pta73bs2.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de> References: <200404151110.i3FBAaoo048373@adsl-68-76-19-75.dsl.klmzmi.ameritech.net> <200404161720.37041.dgw@liwest.at> <87pta73bs2.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 16 April 2004 20:31, Kai Grossjohann wrote: > Daniela <dgw@liwest.at> writes: > > What? C++ code is converted to C? Which compiler are you using, and > > why the hell would a compiler do this? > > In the old days, C++ was implemented by a program called cfront, I > believe, and it did convert C++ to C. > > If you can write a program that converts language X to C, then you get > to take advantage of all the nifty optimizing C compilers out there. > If you try to go the direct route to compiling into machine language, > then you need to do the optimization part yourself. So converting > into C as an intermediary language is an option that requires less > work. There's no harm in doing the optimizing yourself. If you compile directly, then you can optimize much more because you can take advantage of the structure of the language. Two different languages always have different strengths and weak points. BTW, when I need somthing optimized, I'll do it in assembly anyway. > GCC has a backend which can server as an intermediary language, I > guess, but if you convert into C, then you aren't even wedded to GCC. > > Kai > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200404162241.56535.dgw>