Re: linux headers and C++

Frank Butter (fbutter@ottomall.com.tw)
Wed, 07 Jul 1999 10:12:06 +0800 (CST)

On 06-Jul-99 Alan Cox wrote:
>> Apart from this C++ is no more just a
>> pre-processor. Of course a C and ASM
>> hacker could feel in this way, but it's not
>> true; C++ could be used as an improved-C
>> or as a full-featured OO-language. Using
>
> C++ is a preprocessor, nothing more. Check how the original C++ compiler was
> implemented.

so "C" is just a processor then - or is it a programming language?
depends on how you look at it. I think that first it's standardized
semantic - this is the more important thing for an implementation.
the preprocessor is just the common way of implementation, right?

I don't want to argue, but I think modularization and OO are quite
different. of course - everybody is free to define OO for himself...

frank

---
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cookie of the day:
"I may not be totally perfect, but parts of me are excellent."
                -- Ashleigh Brilliant








~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Frank Butter <fbutter@ottomall.com.tw>
sent on 07-Jul-99, at 10:00:01
OTTO-Chailease Mailorder Co., Ltd., Taipei




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/