Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 11:05:48 -0700 From: Chris Pressey <cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> To: Dan MacMillan <flowers@users.sourceforge.net> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Beginning C++ in FreeBSD Message-ID: <20040421110548.20d8e75c.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> In-Reply-To: <FGEIJLCPFDNMGDOKNBABCEAICKAA.flowers@users.sourceforge.net> References: <200404202124.50967.dgw@liwest.at> <FGEIJLCPFDNMGDOKNBABCEAICKAA.flowers@users.sourceforge.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[let's move this to -chat out of consideration for the individuals who are more concerned with asking/answering questions about FreeBSD] On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 23:28:48 -0600 Dan MacMillan <flowers@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > > > From: Daniela > > > > Sent: April 17, 2004 04:50 > > > > > > > > OO languages can be optimized differently than non-OO languages, > > > > and when you translate one language into another, this advantage > > > > gets lost. > > > > > > I challenge you to defend this claim with a specific example. > > > > I don't really have a specific example, but it's quite the same with > > human languages. The more often a text is translated, the more > > useless information > > gets added to it. And if the original text is beautifully written, > > it is often total crap when you translate it back. > > These are not analagous. The reason things get lost in the > translation of human language is that it is not possible to represent > every expression in one human language with complete precision in > another. I challenge you to defend this (Sapir-Worfian) claim with a specific example. :) > However, it =is= possible to represent object orientation > with complete precision in a procedural language. To support object > orientation, C++ adds to C an intrinsic this pointer and vtables. > These concepts can be expressed explicitly in C without loss of > fidelity. That (the Turing-Church thesis) is not at issue. What is at issue is opportunities for optimization. I can't say for "Object Orientation" specifically (since there are as many definitions of an "OO language" as there are "OO languages",) but in general, translation between languages *can* result in a loss of opportunities for optimization. For example, if you translate a program from a language with partially-specified evaluation order to one with strict & fully-specified evaluation order, do you not lose the opportunity to optimize it by reordering evaluations? -Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040421110548.20d8e75c.cpressey>