Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!cognos!geovision!alastair From: alastair@geovision.UUCP (Alastair Mayer) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: C++ vs Objective-C Message-ID: <185@geovision.UUCP> Date: Fri, 25-Sep-87 11:33:56 EDT Article-I.D.: geovisio.185 Posted: Fri Sep 25 11:33:56 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 30-Sep-87 02:42:51 EDT References: <3405@ece-csc.UUCP> <638@its63b.ed.ac.uk> <1811@watcgl.waterloo.edu> <1971@tekig5.TEK.COM> Reply-To: alastair@geovision.UUCP (Alastair Mayer) Organization: Geovision Corporation, Ottawa, Canada Lines: 28 Xref: dciem comp.lang.misc:633 comp.lang.smalltalk:302 comp.lang.c++:401 In article <1971@tekig5.TEK.COM> tomm@tekig5.UUCP (Tom Milligan) writes: > >Both Objective-C and C++ are C language Preprocessors. Thus the capablility Sorry, no. Objective-C is indeed a preprocessor, but C++ is a C superset and the C++ 'program' is actually a *compiler* for the language C++. It is C++ (specifically the 'cfront' pass) that does the syntactic and semantic analysis. >exists in both to write "standard" C code. And both produce as their output, >"standard" C code. Both provide extenstions to the C language to support the The release version of C++ does happen to use your existing C compiler as a code-generator. However, the output from C++ is a C-language version of the internal parse tree, ie new code, not the old code with the C++ extensions translated. I understand that the C++ compiler used internally at Bell Labs bypasses this step. >and that this makes things un-unified is bogus. There are only C structures >in both C++ and Objective-C. Maybe in terms of the structures, perhaps. But in terms of what a program in the language *looks* like, C++ is far more unified. I think Objective-C does far more violence to the syntax of C than does C++. -- Alastair JW Mayer BIX: al UUCP: ...!utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!cognos!geovision!alastair "What we really need is a good 5-cent/gram launch vehicle."