MUD-Dev
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: [MUD-Dev] Languages
[My apologies for continuing this thread - I'll keep it short.]
[Jeff K;]
:Remember that C++ gives you multiple ways to do inlines.
:
:Infact there is NO reason why C++ shoudl have ANY more voerhead then C IF
:youvundertsnad what the compiler is doing and code to it correctly.
Yes, but then the body of those routines has to be in the header file. This
is the exact opposite of what information and implementation hiding is all
about. I'm much more a fan of those than of C++'s wierd "object" stuff.
:Typicly the reason C++ code ends up slower is due to mis-coding of
:constructors by peopel who do NOT understand whats going on underneath.
Sounds reasonable to me. So you suggest that C++ is a language that should
only be used by programmers already trained on other languages, so that
they can understand how to use C++ properly?
--
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA
- Thread context:
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Languages, (continued)
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Languages,
Jeff Kesselman jeffk#tenetwork,com, Sun 25 May 1997, 02:36 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Languages,
coder coder#ibm,net, Sun 25 May 1997, 03:28 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Languages,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Sun 25 May 1997, 05:11 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Languages,
Cynbe ru Taren cynbe#laurel,actlab.utexas.edu, Sun 25 May 1997, 05:33 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Languages,
Jeff Kesselman jeffk#tenetwork,com, Sun 25 May 1997, 05:43 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Languages,
Jeff Kesselman jeffk#tenetwork,com, Sun 25 May 1997, 08:10 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]