Re: assembler [was: Re: cheers for gogo]

[Alastair Donlon <nospam [at] netsoc.ucd.ie>]

On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 12:51:01PM +0000, Al Hudson wrote:
> 
> Heh, here comes Mr. C++ to defend his language of choice ;))...
> 
> I don't know how people can call C++ bloated. For a start, it's just a
> language, which may be translated into asm in any way a compiler sees fit.
> There is no unique C++ -> Asm mapping function available. To call a
> compiler bloated, maybe, but not the language.

Of course you can call a language bloated. When it offers features in
a myriad of possible ways that do exactly the same things. That's the
difference between, say, Scheme and Common LISP. I would argue that
C++ gives the programmer too much freedom to do things as he/she
wants. It gives you all the rope you want to hang yourself with. Much
of the functionality is only useful in a very small number of circumstances.
In other cases, it may be used, but it is not the best solution. Operator
overloading is one example, 'friendly' classes are another.

A.D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.