From: Christian Krüger (christian.krueger_at_pace.de)
Date: 2003-03-05 10:34:36
Hi, > I don't consider C++ worse - it's pretty standard now. > > OSU (wwww.orst.edu i believe) tried Java for awhile, and no one could > get jobs because of lack of C++ skills. > > I'm sure with a little bit of learning the rules, I'll be > able to write > C code. > > Still, would be nice to see a C++ compiler for the venerable c64!!! even when this is getting off topic: Why? The code would be slower & bigger - so why making a small plattform even smaller? BTW: C++ is not the solution I'd like to have for an object oriented programming language, which IMHO should produce fast code (Java is of course even more worse) and is 'clean & plain' in usage. There are so many lacks - I've got a personal list of C++ issues of things which could be done better.. ;^) ..and it's getting bigger & bigger. IMHO somebody have to invent a *clean* _and_ fast code producing OO-language. A 'real' OO-C-successor... not a upward compatibility OO-C-mixture. Samples? Just think about 'information hiding' and the readability of protected & private members/functions in 'exported' h-files. Or constructor independent defaulting of members when declaring them in the class. Or why is it possible to declare a destructor 'non-virtual'? See the issues in http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~nathan/notcpp.html too - it is very insightful... Regards chrisker ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2003-03-05 16:22:45 CET