To: adalee AT sendit DOT sendit DOT nodak DOT edu Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: Quake vs. Demos Message-ID: <19970530.213927.7111.0.fwec@juno.com> References: <199705302154 DOT QAA24261 AT sendit DOT sendit DOT nodak DOT edu> From: fwec AT juno DOT com (Mark T Logan) Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 21:38:49 EDT Precedence: bulk On Fri, 30 May 1997 16:54:16 -0500 (CDT) Adam W Lee writes: >C++ is the embodiment of >pretty code, and it sucks. C++ does not suck. It simply is not the ideal language for all situations. If you try to code a procedure oriented program, such as a game, with it, you are cruisin' for a bruisin'. However, ask any software engineer, computer science student, or for that matter a professor, and they will tell that C++ and other object oriented languages are indisposable. You see, when a team of twenty people start to work on a massive program, a procedure oriented language simply ***will not work***. The problem is that the complexity of today's software is too much for the human mind to comprehend. With a procedure oriented language, all parts of the program are inextricably linked with the rest of the program. You cannot write one part of the program without understanding the rest of the program, and that's impossible. With an object oriented language, you only have to understand the class that you are writing. The rest of the program is unimportant. Each class handles one task, has its own data members which cannot be accessed by any other part of the program. This allows a team member to write one part of the program, and integrate it with the rest of the program that has been written by someone else. Of course, C++, IMHO, is not for games, or anything that has to run quickly. With a speed critical app, you have to know every part of your program inside and out, so that when you start optimizing, you have a clear idea of how the program works. Anyhoo, sorry for writing a novel. fwec AT juno DOT com