CompuServe Messages

Greg, Hi :-). Your late response to my message took my response completley out of context. In my message, I was describing 'politely' how C++ is NOT BASIC and performance degradation is not even an issue in my case. So when I said "I can see how C++ in general will result in larger and slower code", I was just being polite when responding to a message describing C++ as a language only for super computers. The following is a list of my messages OUT OF context with the real context in capital letters: -1- I can see how C++ in general will result in larger and slower code. I WAS BEING POLITE, NOTICE THE WORD 'GENERAL'. -2-(and C++ is becoming equivalent to BASIC) I'll put in my 2 cents. HERE I WAS REALLY SURPRISED WHEN I READ THE MESSAGE, SO I WROTE THE ABOVE SENTENCE. -3- Even though my code is bigger and generally slower, the benefits of using C++ (or Object Oriented Languages) outway the performance degradation. THE BENEFITS OUTWAY THE PERFORMANCE DEGRADATION (WHICH ARE MINISCULE)!. Ok now that I am little bit in context, I'll respond to some of your points, followed by a question: >I cannot. This is not to imply that certain features in C++ do not have >performance or size tradeoffs: some unequivocally do. >However, the issue on the table is not to compare features The issue was that C++ will result in super slow code and the language is bad and decreasing in popularity which resulted in my message. C++ is NOT a language for super computers only and its NOT decreasing in popularity. As a matter of fact, one of the main reasons its increasing in popularity at a much higher rate than SmallTalk for example, is because of the speed. —————————————– >C++ code is just as fast, but larger. I agree, but I guess 'just as fast' will depend on your compiler. Sometimes 'larger' implies 'slower'. —————————————– >>(and C++ is becoming equivalent to BASIC) I'll put in my 2 cents: >Eh? Or do you popularity-wise? Yes popularity wise. I get very discouraged when I see messages from leading Amiga developers discrediting an entire language. I would like to have RogueWave's libraries ported to the Amiga. I would like ZINC, ZAPP and XVT crossplatform development tools include the Amiga as one of the platforms. I would like an Amiga that I buy in the store that has networking and mail built in. How about OpenDoc on the Amiga. But when your leading Amiga developers campain for assembly as the only true langage, then the only way is popularity-wise. (and in this case its not C= who is hurting the Amiga). ——————————————- >>- Even though my code is bigger and generally slower, I think the >>benefits of using C++ (or Object Oriented Languages) outway the >>performance degradation. >That might be a valid compromise for some other language since it is not >slower, this conclusion is not valid. THERE IS a performance degradation. Pick a program or several programs that we will both code to the best of our abilities in C and C++ then compile using SAS (cfront 2.1 :-)) and we'll see the difference. ——————————————- >>- After writting your code, you can always find the areas that are >>performance sensitive and write pieces of that code in assembly. If you >>find yourself rewritting everything, then I think there is a problem in >>the design. >Both of these points have _always_ been true no matter what the language, >so singling out C++ here is bogus. (And a nit: going to assembly is not >the only course of action, but certain one that many should consider). If the points are true for all laguages that means its true for C++. Since we were talking about C++, singling out C++ is NOT bogus. And finally the question: The thread started with SAS dumping the Amiga and someone saying that SAS's work is anyway complete. Then I responded that as far as C++, its not really complete since I miss templates and expection handling and a few other things. Then a bunch of messages were added about how bad C++ for the Amiga is. Are you against or with C++ development on the Amiga platform? or are you just discussing langages in general? Hani