Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:17640 comp.lang.fortran:1936
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!apollo!mrst!sdti!turner
From: turner@sdti.SDTI.COM (Prescott K. Turner)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: fortran to C converter
Message-ID: <449@sdti.SDTI.COM>
Date: 13 Apr 89 14:44:00 GMT
References: <1992@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> <11926@lanl.gov>
Reply-To: turner@sdti.UUCP (0006-Prescott K. Turner, Jr.)
Organization: Software Development Technologies, Sudbury MA
Lines: 27

In article <11926@lanl.gov> jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
>The problem with this is that all the primitive operations on 'objects'
>in C++ is done with procedure calls. 
>...
>I've not heard that inlining is available on any C++ presently marketed.

Inlining is an explicit feature of C++ which is supported by AT&T's cfront
and by the majority of marketed C++'s as they are based on cfront.  Inlining
is also supported by Zortech C++ and to the best of my knowledge by EVERY
C++ presently marketed.

>The problem is that the 'inlining' requires the source (or some
>intermediate form) of the function library to be present at compile time.
Compiling the user's code only requires the source of the procedures which
are declared inline.  A substantial C++ package is best off with only a small
part of its code in the inline procedure definitions.  A package need be
distributed only with its header (INCLUDE) files.

>Genuine function overloading is more general, easier to understand, and could
>be just as efficient.
Perhaps it "could be".  But no other language surpasses C++ in availability
and efficient support for dynamic overloading.
--
Prescott K. Turner, Jr.
Software Development Technologies, Inc.
P.O. Box 366, Sudbury, MA 01776 USA         (508) 443-5779
UUCP: ...{harvard,mit-eddie}!sdti!turner    Internet: turner@sdti.sdti.com