From:	Endlisnis <s257m AT unb DOT ca>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Namespaces
Date:	Thu, 10 Sep 1998 18:14:51 -0300
Organization:	NBTel Internet
Lines:	19
Message-ID:	<35F8414B.C559D94D@unb.ca>
References:	<000101bdd371$223b03a0$384e08c3 AT arthur> <35F5C1BE DOT 436251A0 AT bellatlantic DOT net> <6t5nsn$piv$1 AT nnrp1 DOT dejanews DOT com> <35F717ED DOT 45BCBF6E AT bellatlantic DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	fctnts10c71.nbnet.nb.ca
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

> I think we'll see a lot of C++ stuff migrating over to C such as try and
> catch.  Then the problem will be how to differentiate C from C++.  Like,
> is the goal of C to be a sort of "C++-lite" without classes?  For
> example:  if you do a lot of low-level hardware stuff and/or need a low
> memory footprint and low CPU usage, then use C over C++.  But then again
> C++ compilers are fast catching up to C compilers in terms of executable
> size and speed, so the point may come where we may have to say "why not
> just merge C with C++" since there's so much diffusion back and forth.
	Well, since C++ is (basically) a superset of C, that has aldready happened. 
I don't understand any advantages to using C over C++ other than the possible
difference in optimization/memory footprint.  What does C have that C++
doesn't?  [and I don't mean things like slightly different syntax]
-- 
     (\/) Endlisnis (\/)
          s257m AT unb DOT ca
          Endlisnis AT GeoCities DOT com
          Endlis AT nbnet DOT nb DOT ca

- Raw text -