From: Jim Peters (jim_at_uazu.net)
Date: 2002-03-20 13:40:38
sleeper75se wrote:
> On choosing Java or C++:
>
> This is a tough one. We need to find a middle ground because we need
> everybody to be involved.
For now forget GCJ, because getting it running on Windows isn't
something that's going to happen very soon. (I've had loads of
problems building the GCC 3.1 CVS code targetted for anything except
Linux -- I even tried on Mac OS X. This is one monster of a tool,
with over 100Mb of source. I'm going to give it a rest for now,
although I'll stay on the lists and watch for interesting
developments.)
> Jim-P, can you write "objectified-C"? That is, regular C code but
> with the addition of a few key C++ features. (Classes, exceptions,
> using references)
Writing it is one thing, feeling happy about the result is another.
But yes, I am capable of writing easy C++, especially if someone has
already set up some kind of a structure I have to use. At one point I
was completely up to speed on most of the C++ language features,
including templates and exceptions, custom new/delete operators, and
so on. Namespaces are new since I last looked at C++, though, and I
know very little about the standard libraries.
> If we create a set of data types on top of the standard template
> library types, it would spare us from "raw stl". STL code is compact
> but quite difficult to read for someone with a C-only background. It
> would be very much like Java, but with a custom set of utility
> classes.
I can't argue, as my attempt at providing a solution has not worked
out. ;-(
Jim
-- Jim Peters (_)/=\~/_(_) jim_at_uazu.net (_) /=\ ~/_ (_) Uazú (_) /=\ ~/_ (_) http:// B'ham, UK (_) ____ /=\ ____ ~/_ ____ (_) uazu.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:43 BST