Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!unixhub!ditka!comeau From: comeau@ditka.Chicago.COM (Greg Comeau) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: OOP (was Re: Assembly Language & Programming) Message-ID: <37046@ditka.Chicago.COM> Date: 18 Apr 91 15:25:05 GMT References: Sender: comeau@ditka.chicago.com (Greg Comeau) Reply-To: comeau@csanta.attmail.com (Greg Comeau) Organization: Comeau Computing Lines: 50 In article nv89-nun@dront.nada.kth.se (Nicklas Ungman) writes: >The advantages of object oriented languages is many, but the most important is >Modularity and Resusability of Code. What makes them so great for games is how >consider the data and the code. I don't know much about game technology, but I do agree with your statement. Individuals must be shown examples of it though. I know for myself, I had scorned both C++ and OOP before I got involved with it because at the time I didn't have the time to sit with it for even a few seconds and hence was an opponent since "I was a good C programmer" and what did I need this "hyped garbage" for. >In object oriented programming you modulate objects which consist of both >data and code tied together as an entity. You form these objects very much >like reality. This lets the game designer focus on game design, not on >programming. After all, many components in a computer game are often objects >or entities. I wouldn't go so far as to say that one doesn't have to not be concerned with the programming. One *does* have to beinvolved with that aspect. However, what it offers is that the focus in the right places can be more intense and proper. >One disadvantage of object oriented programming is speed. The overhead >is a few percents and can be cruisal in some action games. But in many >cases the advantage is greater (I've experimenting with and Asteroids- >like game in Object Pascal on Macintosh so I know it works). That is NOT a disadvantage of OOP. That is a disadvantage of some OOP/OOL implementations which is a totally different story. In the case of something like C++, it has been proven time and time again that C++ is no more in/efficient as C is. >I also hope for better compilers in the future (many C++ compilers are >actually pre-compilers) You imply translating compilers (not pre-compilers) != better compiler. The truth of the matter is that something like AT&T cfront, which Comeau C++, is based on, is the most robust C++ compiler technology around. And it's up-to-date too. I don't want to sound rude, but I don't see the merit in that analogy. If you meant that you want to see a nice C++ environment, then, yes, I drool for it myself, but I think that a different issue than what you mentioned. - 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