Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19980907123951.214fa844@shadow.net>
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 12:39:51
To: Elliott Oti <oti AT phys DOT uu DOT nl>
From: Ralph Proctor <ralphgpr AT shadow DOT net>
Subject: RE: C++ in Mail Archive
Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.95.980907142227.23461B-100000@ruunf0.phys.uu.nl
 >
References: <3 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 16 DOT 19980906135107 DOT 094fdb70 AT shadow DOT net>
 <3 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 16 DOT 19980906104752 DOT 1f177e18 AT shadow DOT net>
 <3 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 16 DOT 19980906135107 DOT 094fdb70 AT shadow DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Precedence: bulk

At 12:43 PM 9/7/98 GMT, you wrote:

>Big plusses of C++ (in order of importance to me):
>  Templates
>  Class inheritance
>  Operator and function overloading (in moderation)

Okay. Noted. 

>The problem with g++ is that instantiated templates aren't optimized very
>well (practically not at all, in fact, which is a big pity). In general,
>C++ code is not optimized as well as C code by DJGPP, which is something
>to bear in mind if you are using C++ mainly because of the syntactic
>sugar. 

I guess this will be improved as time goes on unless there is some
technical limitation.

>A which-is-better-C-or-C++ war seems to me to be inappropriate on this
>newsgroup; each language has its own advantages and pitfalls. It is best
>to learn C++ and decide for yourself. Bear in mind that though you may
>know C perfectly and learn the C++ syntax quickly, it will take some time
>to get comfortable with the C++ programming mindset. 

I agree. I did not have in mind any "better-than" war. We already know C++
is more efficient for certain types of programs. What I am curious about it
how we normally move from C to C++ because of need for this efficiency.

Now the following is sure not a "war" remark: I just don't see a beginner
starting out in C++ with no C experience, but I do see a C programmer
moving to C++ for [.....................] reasons--that's what I had in mind.

Thanks.

Ralph