Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 07:07:26 +0930 From: "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Cc: Benjamin Lutz <benlutz@datacomm.ch> Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? Message-ID: <200604160707.27476.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> In-Reply-To: <4441199C.4090802@carebears.mine.nu> References: <200604151313.32519.benlutz@datacomm.ch> <4441199C.4090802@carebears.mine.nu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart1898354.FAQ3kS0XKL Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Sunday 16 April 2006 01:34, Christer Solskogen wrote: > > My first guess is that it's a habit. People dealing with the FreeBSD > > source code are used to C, and therefore use that for their apps. If it= 's > > only that, there'd be no good reason for not writing a tool like cvsup = in > > C++, right? Or is there a more technical reason? > > If you really want you can code whatever tool you need in c++. I guess > cvsup was rewritten in C because the developer understands C, and not > C++ (or the task of rewrite cvsup in C++ would be harder) A not insignificant reason (IMO) is that C++ is much slower to compile.. Also, gcc didn't use to be (ie when FreeBSD was started) a good C++ compile= r. =2D-=20 Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C --nextPart1898354.FAQ3kS0XKL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBEQWeX5ZPcIHs/zowRAnv4AJ0eQJS/PQlNsE2qv0O9c+j7jgJlbwCfSvAR SZkanhDCJDf6QZVNjEoGcz4= =w8+S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1898354.FAQ3kS0XKL--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200604160707.27476.doconnor>