From: Alexandre Oliva (oliva@dcc.unicamp.br)
Date: Wed Jan 27 1999 - 11:21:06 EST
On Jan 27, 1999, Godmar Back <gback@cs.utah.edu> wrote:
> Also, C++ compilers are still slower than C compilers, last time I heard.
That's history already :-)
> Plus, rewriting it would be an effort I don't want to undertake right now.
There's no need to rewrite, C++ is almost 100% backward-compatible
with C; we could rewrite on demand.
> The other reason I want to avoid C++ is because people like you
> will then start using all its bells and whistles, and I'd rather not
> argue about why using copy constructors and multiple inheritance is a
> bad idea.
There are good and bad uses for them all. But I don't think there's
any need for using C++ right now... I can live with the additional
explicit argument :-)
> Implementations of the interface will look like this:
> struct _CollectorImpl {
> Collector collector; // pointer to shared vtable
> gcList gclists[5];
I still don't see the point of adding an extra level of indirection
(although only at source code level). It seems a mere inconvenience
to me.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva aoliva@{acm.org}
oliva@{dcc.unicamp.br,gnu.org,egcs.cygnus.com,samba.org}
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 19:57:50 EDT