Re: [buildcheapeeg] PC software

From: Rob Sacks (editor_at_realization.org)
Date: 2001-05-21 02:36:53


The problem with requiring contributions to be limited to the
C subset of C++ is that the program could not have a modern
object-oriented architecture. (It's theoretically possible but
not practical.)

I think we should plan to build our source code from
the building blocks of C++ classes. This isn't possible
with C.

> in fact the difference is not large enough .

I don't understand why you say this. It seems to me
that the difference is enormous. It's like the difference
between a Wright Brothers airplane and a 747.

Just one C++ feature alone -- virtual function tables --
are so powerful and wonderful that they change a
whole program radically.
----- Original Message -----
From: Waldemar Neto
To: buildcheapeeg_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: [buildcheapeeg] PC software

The use of 1989 standard C make the routine directly suitable
for Linux, ( beyond Windows and DOS ) .
Otherwise the effort to convert C++ to 1989 standard C is the almost
the same to vice-versa .

I think standard C is the best language for that purpose, but we could also do both ( driver do Linux ) and ( ocx or DLL for Windows ), in fact thedifference is not large enough .



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:30 BST