Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hplabs!hp-pcd!hplsla!jima
From: jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: objective c
Message-ID: <6590099@hplsla.HP.COM>
Date: 17 Apr 89 18:32:40 GMT
References: <4800061@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Lines: 32

I stand by my original posting.  This is the
best comparison I can give at this time on
the relative speed of C++ and Objective-C.

I stated the ground rules for my comparison, and I
have no affiliation to either language, other than
as a user [abuser] of both.  I believe this is
fair.  When you're looking at a 10X speed differential,
who cares if the answer is really 7.5X or 15X?

I have deep-sixed ObjC after programming it for
a couple years in favor of C++.  ObjC code
commanly came out 10-100X slower than a similar
approach in C or C++, and code sizes several times
larger.   After extensive hacking, 
destroying the "Objective-ness" of our approach,
we could maybe get that down to a 2X-5X range.

To me, C++ is object-oriented, and ObjC isn't.

You claim the opposite.  To you only the slow
approach of ObjC is "object oriented." To me
only the fast, typed approach of C++ is object
oriented.  To me "object oriented" is a characteristic
of what I, the coder writes, and can afford to
write.  It is not a characteristic of the 
machine code a compiler [interpreter?] emits.

Sorry if you feel left behind.

Maybe it is time for an ObjC notesgroup, if only
so C++ users can leave this debate behind them?