Re: [Sheflug] c++ & mem

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

On Sat, 9 Dec 2000, Alex Hudson wrote:

> > I don't follow. C and C++ code can be indistinguishable.
>
> Key phrase, "can be" ;)

So there is no "C code" and "C++ code" unless a specific feature is used.

> Rubbish. Templates? Specialisation? STL? That's all about optimisation of
> generic code. As for performance penalties, yes, you expect to get a penalty

Optimization? Not exactly, stretching a point.

> for using such things as polymorphism, inheritance, etc. C can't do these
> things - what's your point? Virtually all the new features of C++ are
> "zero-overhead" (i.e. you don't pay for what you don't use).

Often you have to be explicit about it though (i.e. use flags). I don't
why people seem to think C++ and Java are the only "OO languages". OO is a
programmer feature, not a language feature. Using structs in C you can do
a lot of what C does, and smaller and faster. Polymorphism is not really
anything but artificial syntactic sweetener.

> > No it, tells you the C++ compiler is working.
>
> "g++ is gcc anyway, so if you've compiled things on your system before,
> compiling that program tells you nothing".

g++ is not gcc. (Dunno who's quote that is, but it isn't mine)

> iostreams doesn't work? In what way? How do iostreams "not work"? libstdc++
> is
> a bit more than iostreams, anyhow...

Ugly, ugly, ugly. I just can't stand them. :)
printf() is more cryptic, but so much quicker and easier.

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