Re: [Sheflug] c++ & mem

[Will Newton <nospam [at] misconception.org.uk>]

On Sat, 9 Dec 2000, Alex Hudson wrote:

> Old code, yes, efficient code? I don't think I necessarily agree with that.
> Efficient, maybe, if the coder is a C coder who doesn't do so much C++. C++
> overall is generally much nicer to streamline than C code.

I don't follow. C and C++ code can be indistinguishable. The only features
of C++ I use are better typesafety, polymorphism, templates, and a little
bit of STL. And none of those makes optimizing any quicker.
C++ has several hidden performance penalties. (Mainly size rather than
speed)

> need to test the compiler *with* C++, not C - that means the libraries, etc.
> If you compile that C hello world, it means you have C dev libraries
> installed. Woopee-doo. That's no use if you want to program C++ eventually.
> g++ is gcc anyway, so if you've compiled things on your system before,
> compiling that program tells you nothing.

No it, tells you the C++ compiler is working. It doesn't tell you that you
have the iostream bits working, but IMO iostream has never worked anyway.

> Not necessarily. They might take you to task for using cio rather than
> iostreams, but that's another matter ;)

printf(), you know you want to. :)


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.