Re: OOP

From: santosh <santosh.k83@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:38:03 +0530

campyhapper@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Hi folks,

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?

Here's your cue Jacob. :-)

.

References:
- OOP
  - From: campyhapper

Prev by Date: Re: Promoting unsigned long int to long int
Next by Date: Re: Promoting unsigned long int to long int
Previous by thread: Re: OOP
Next by thread: Re: OOP
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Relevant Pages

OOP
... and of course I know that structs ... an object-oriented design. ... like templates, multiple inheritance and the like? ...
(comp.lang.c)
Re: a step into the lisp world
... But even though I use structs a lot, I don't know if I quite agree ... will be no subclasses or I'm sure I know what they're all going to be, ... and I don't need multiple inheritance etc., then I will use a struct. ... Unfortunately that's a rather complicated rule to convey to a newbie. ...
(comp.lang.lisp)
Re: OOP
... and of course I know that structs ... an object-oriented design. ... There is a book called Object Orientated Programming in ANSI C. ... You may want to check it out, not sure how good it is as I have not had a chance to read it but if you are interested it is out there. ...
(comp.lang.c)
Re: OOP
... and of course I know that structs ... an object-oriented design. ... to C just a few key features and disallows things ... The language will work just as well. ...
(comp.lang.c)