Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu!es1
From: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: C++
Message-ID: <1991Apr15.222555.24808@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 15 Apr 91 22:25:55 GMT
References: <50511@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <36852@ditka.Chicago.COM>
Sender: usenet@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Network News)
Reply-To: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita)
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 27
Nntp-Posting-Host: cunixb.cc.columbia.edu

In article <36852@ditka.Chicago.COM> comeau@csanta.attmail.com (Greg Comeau) writes:
>The goal is to strive for a natural an integration as possible.  Your
>C solution does not do that.  The C++ way is "just there" and simple
>to use.  So long as the C++ way is like that and available, seems the
>slight of hand C alternative is greatly inferior.
>
>
	But it would seem to be very hard to optimize the C code
generated by C++, as compared to writing the C code directly. It
isn't like you can write in C++, translate to C, and then muck
around easily in the C code, not that even doing that would be
optimal. I don't know too much about C++, but I do remember
something about name mangling which would drive me up the wall.
	So, how does optimization of code compare?

>- Greg
>-- 
>	 Comeau Computing, 91-34 120th Street, Richmond Hill, NY, 11418
>                            Producers of Comeau C++
>          Here:attmail.com!csanta!comeau / BIX:comeau / CIS:72331,3421
>                     Voice:718-945-0009 / Fax:718-441-2310


	-- Ethan

Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb
A: None. It's a hardware problem.