Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!husc6!purdue!decwrl!megatest!djones
From: djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Object-oriented techniques in C
Message-ID: <576@goofy.megatest.UUCP>
Date: 27 May 88 20:33:40 GMT
References: <384@otc.oz>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Megatest Corporation, San Jose, Ca
Lines: 51

From article <384@otc.oz>, by mikem@otc.oz (Mike Mowbray):
> In article <552@goofy.megatest.UUCP>, djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave Jones) says:
> 
>> Still, almost anything you can do in C++, you can do in C.  (Proof: cfront
>> generates C-code.)
> 
> Yes.
> 
> I think I will probably strangle the next person around here who tells me
> that they can do what C++ does in C, (or some other language of similar
> level). I could do what C++ does even in assembler; [Proof: C++ gets turned
> into C which gets turned into assembly code]. Extrapolating that argument one
> step further implies that we make do with binary machine code(!)
> 
> "There is none so blind as he who ...."
> 

I think I will probably decapitate and eviscerate the next person who
says he will strangle me.  :-)  Now that the pleasantries are disposed of,
let's see here about this "blindness" premise:

I don't think your assembly language *reductio ad absurbum* holds water.
With C, it is usually possible to write machine-independant code.  Not
so with assembler.  C does semantic translation from the C-virtual machine 
to the machine for which it is compiling (perhaps real, perhaps virtual).

C++, though very useful, has the same underlying virtual machine as C --
intentionally so.  The value of C++ is that it automates name-space 
reorganization from an o-o hierachy of classes to the flat name-space of C.

This you can do "by hand", although at the expense of some tedium and an 
increased likelyhood of mistakes. But having done so, you will have a 
machine-independant computer program.

As I noted in the original letter, C++ does more than just reorganize the 
names.  Inline procedure expantion is an example I gave where C++ does
semantic translation, rather than just reorganiztion.  But you can
fake that somewhat with macros.  They're not as good, but you can
survive.  There are other examples.  Still I stand by what I say.

Purhaps I should have said, "C++ is a very useful tool.  But there is
more to be gained from organizing libraries and programs around data-objects
than there is to be gained from selecting a programming language which
is desinged for that purpose.  It is extremely desirable, however, to
select a language which is supported on a large variety of architectures."




			Your truly,

			J. Ripper, ret.