Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 23:36:02 -0500 From: "G. Adam Stanislav" <adam@whizkidtech.net> To: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: c9x (new ANSI C) Message-ID: <19990520233602.G255@whizkidtech.net> In-Reply-To: <199905201941.NAA07094@harmony.village.org>; from Warner Losh on Thu, May 20, 1999 at 01:41:37PM -0600 References: <19990519180151.A226@whizkidtech.net> <19990519170823.A240@whizkidtech.net> <Pine.BSF.4.10.9905191811090.69006-100000@picnic.mat.net> <19990519180151.A226@whizkidtech.net> <199905201941.NAA07094@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 01:41:37PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > In message <19990519180151.A226@whizkidtech.net> "G. Adam Stanislav" writes: > : And the MS book was outright lying (gee, surprise): It claimed that > : one of the biggest advantages of C++ over C is that if you change > : the C++ class, you need not recompile the code using it. What a > : piece of bunk. In C++ the caller allocates the memory called by the > : class. > > Some SGI compilers get around this somehow. They are really much > nicer to work with than the cfront based compilers and their > descendants. I'm glad to hear that. That would make the code much more robust. I was only exposed to MS VC++, and I am very glad I always examine the assembly language output of anything I write in a high-level language! It was a mess. Of course, everything from MS is.... Adam To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990520233602.G255>