|
| From: | Tom Bachmann |
| Subject: | Re: C++ |
| Date: | Thu, 24 Sep 2009 08:51:49 +0200 |
| User-agent: | Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103) |
Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Tom Bachmann <address@hidden
<mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
I strongly side with bas here. Even if you hate so many things about
C++ (which I'm not going to argue about), the syntactic sugar for
non-fancy OOP (i.e. class and method structure, single inheritance)
is a sufficient reason to use C++ IMHO.
That is certainly a credible argument for application code.
For microkernel code, I can only tell you that we downgraded from C++
back to C in Coyotos, and that doing so simultaneously reduced
complexity and increased performance.
That's interesting to hear. Any specific reasons? (When looking at the pistachio source every now and then, I think I can somewhat imagine why.)
For application code, the hazard is that all implementations of abstraction involve indirection, indirection is slow, and all OO languages have as a primary objective the seduction of young programmers into an abiding love of gratuitous abstraction. And they succeed!
Oh dear, I'm busted. Guess what language I learned first *g*. (Yes, it is C++, and yes, I subscribe to the "abstract whenever it makes your code look nicer" paradigm. But I think I also know when and how to break, or to omit in the first place, abstractions for performance.)
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |