Re: [64-bit] Pascal Compiler inherently Faster than C++ ?
From: Alisdair Meredith (alisdair.meredith_at_no-spam-splease@uk.renaultf1.com)
Date: 02/21/05
- Next message: Angra Mainyu: "Re: Delphi2005 BETA"
- Previous message: QHenrick_Hellstr=F6m_=5BStreamSec=5D=22?=: "Re: [64-bit] Pascal Compiler inherently Faster than C++ ?"
- In reply to: Dennis Landi: "Re: [64-bit] Pascal Compiler inherently Faster than C++ ?"
- Next in thread: Dennis Landi: "Re: [64-bit] Pascal Compiler inherently Faster than C++ ?"
- Reply: Dennis Landi: "Re: [64-bit] Pascal Compiler inherently Faster than C++ ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 21 Feb 2005 11:54:43 -0800
Dennis Landi wrote:
> I am saying this is a predilection of the C++ language itself and of
> advanced C++ developers in general. They just love pointers.
I disagree *most* strongly.
As a C++ user I routinely avoid direct pointer use unless there is no
alternative (and there usually is)
The more 'advanced' the C++ user, the more aware they are of language
features and idioms that help them avoid directly manipulating pointers
- this was one of the great advances from 'C' ;?)
No, what advanced C++ users *really* love is templates, and the rest of
the world may regard that with even more horror!
AlisdairM<TeamB>
- Next message: Angra Mainyu: "Re: Delphi2005 BETA"
- Previous message: QHenrick_Hellstr=F6m_=5BStreamSec=5D=22?=: "Re: [64-bit] Pascal Compiler inherently Faster than C++ ?"
- In reply to: Dennis Landi: "Re: [64-bit] Pascal Compiler inherently Faster than C++ ?"
- Next in thread: Dennis Landi: "Re: [64-bit] Pascal Compiler inherently Faster than C++ ?"
- Reply: Dennis Landi: "Re: [64-bit] Pascal Compiler inherently Faster than C++ ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]