From: John Morrison (jmorrison_at_ahc.net.au)
Date: 2002-03-20 14:16:44
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Peters [mailto:jim_at_uazu.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, 20 March 2002 11:41 PM
> To: buildcheapeeg_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [buildcheapeeg] Re: Bodysoft
>
>
> 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.)
That is a disappointment. :-(
What about the alternative Java Compiler you spoke about?
> > 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.
It's amazing how fast we can forget I was quite proficient in C++ but I'd
have to do a refresher now to program in it.
> > 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. ;-(
It was a good try I commend you for it!!!
> Jim
John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:43 BST