Originally posted by sylware
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
GCC Can Now Be Worked On In C++
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by RahulSundaram View PostGCC has for a very long time now supported multiple languages and hardly specific to C anymore.
As long as it will forever be possible to compile the C compiler without having the C++ compiler part of GCC, everyone should be rather happy...
(just like it'd be a nice thing that you could fully compile a C++ compiler without ever having a C compiler in GCC; I don't know whether it's possible now, someone who knows could pong back)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ex-Cyber View PostThe only actual object-oriented feature I see mentioned is multiple inheritance, which is not exactly universally accepted even among OO programmers (Java and C# deliberately omitted it in favor of single inheritance + interfaces, for example).
Originally posted by RahulSundaram View PostGCC has for a very long time now supported multiple languages and hardly specific to C anymore. To be misinformed AND insulting is hardly a good combination. Even assuming that GCC is only a C compiler, there is nothing wrong with writing it in a different language if there is a benefit to doing so. It is entirely up to the developers to decide what the efficient method is.
From a fundamental perspective, C++ is nothing more than a shorthand notation for C. The only aspect in which they differ is in exception handling, which is something that was tacked onto C++, is entirely optional and is often not used. Good programmers never had a need for exception handling anyway.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by reavertm View PostHow about you begin, hmm? Reading your post is waste of everyone's time otherwise.
cheers
his argument is moot anyway, since by that reasoning any programming language by definition would just be syntactic sugar on writing machine code. i think we can all agree that is a stupid notion to defend.
Comment
-
Originally posted by justinkb View Postmaybe read a few good C++ books, say Modern C++ Design by Alexandrescu for example. you'll get an idea why C++ isn't just syntactic sugar on C. not in your wildest dreams could you do in C what is demonstrated in that book. in particular, templates are a game changer, not just "a shorthand notation," as Shining Arcanine stupidly called it.
Alexandrescu was so much enthusiastic about C++ that he decided to design his own programming language. And abusing templates is as bad as abusing C macrodefinitions in terms of code safety and readability - you don't need to read books to know it - you need to write code.
Technically every aspect of C++ can be implemented by the means of C macrodefinitions, in this regard C++ doesn't bring anything exciting apart from tighter type checking and primitive object oriented programming.
Of course it's improvement over C, but just a bit.
Comment
-
Originally posted by reavertm View PostC++ templates are a game changer as much as macrodefinitions in C.
Alexandrescu was so much enthusiastic about C++ that he decided to design his own programming language. And abusing templates is as bad as abusing C macrodefinitions in terms of code safety and readability - you don't need to read books to know it - you need to write code.
Technically every aspect of C++ can be implemented by the means of C macrodefinitions, in this regard C++ doesn't bring anything exciting apart from tighter type checking and primitive object oriented programming.
Of course it's improvement over C, but just a bit.
Comment
Comment