From: imp@boulder.parcplace.com (Warner Losh) Subject: Re: ALPHA-pl11 available on nic: C++ support Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1993 18:26:31 GMT
In article <21s0gm$q5n@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> oreillym@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Michael O'Reilly) writes:
>it runs about 1/2 the speed of optimized C. (due to f**king
>spectacular compiler tech). And it doesn't run on linux. :(
Hmmm, I wonder what C compiler they were comparing it against. There
are some C compilers that really suck and others that generate stellar
code. Does self handle realtime things well, or do you get
unpredictable response times when GC kicks in?
>C++ is pretty un-paletable.. (sp?). The worst features of C combined
>with the worst features of OO programing. I remain certain that the
>only people who like C++ have never programmed in anything but C.
>(don't get me wrong, I like C, but OO can do a lot lot more than
>C++... )
OK, I've stayed out of the flame war after the initial salvos. C++
gets the job done for OO stuff and still lets you get at the bits when
you need to. You might not like it because it isn't a "pure" object
oriented language. That's fine. However, there are several companies
out there getting real work done in C++ and have invested significant
amounts of money in the technology. It works quite well, IMHO, for
programming in OO. There may be other languages that do OO better
than C++, but I think that C++ is a good fusing fo the technologies,
with a few areas around the edges that are rarely used that people
like to complain about...
Oh well, reminds me of the old joke "OO means anything we want it to
mean..."
Warner
-- Warner Losh imp@boulder.parcplace.COM ParcPlace Boulder I've almost finished my brute force solution to subtlety.