Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!lll-winken!uunet!tektronix!tekcrl!tekgvs!jans
From: jans@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Jan Steinman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Objective C: Flame Fodder
Message-ID: <5007@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM>
Date: 26 Apr 89 18:04:54 GMT
Organization: Tektronix Inc., Beaverton, Or.
Lines: 17

I've been playing with a loaned NeXT machine, and am *extremely* impressed with 
it's graphics performance.  (Optical disk performance is another story!)  It is 
much faster than Interviews based code in X11.

Some of the demo code has source with it, and is most certainly Objective C.  
This leads me to think that, well sure, the implementation of C++ is optimized 
for execution efficiency, but who cares?  The NeXT user interface puts X11 to 
shame -- is that the result of Objective C having better efficiency in the 
*coding* phase, versus the *execution* phase?

Does anyone know to what degree the NeXT graphics system code is written in 
Objective C?  If a large proportion of it is Objective C, then I think the 
relative performance issue is a non-issue.

:::::: Jan Steinman - N7JDB		   Electronic Systems Laboratory ::::::
:::::: jans@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM	      Box 500, MS 50-370 (w)503/627-5881 ::::::
:::::: jsteinma@caip.RUTGERS.EDU     Beaverton, OR 97077 (h)503/657-7703 ::::::