Re: OOP
- From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Jun 2008 09:45:56 -0700
campyhapper@xxxxxxxxx writes:
I tend to prefer C, and of course I know that structs
can be used in C to achieve something like
an object-oriented design. And I prefer C in part
because C++ has, I think, grown into a bit of a
monster wherein readability is sacrificed.
But I wonder, has anyone ever tried to create a
sort of lite version of C++, a C+ if you will, that adds
to C just a few key features and disallows things
like templates, multiple inheritance and the like?
There have been a number of such attempts. As far as I know, no two
of them agree on which features are vital and which should be
discarded.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@xxxxxxx <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
.
- References:
- OOP
- From: campyhapper
- OOP
- Prev by Date: Re: Promoting unsigned long int to long int
- Next by Date: Re: Runtime stack allocation
- Previous by thread: Re: OOP
- Next by thread: Re: OOP
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
