[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVR-GCC question

From: Matthew MacClary
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVR-GCC question
Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 11:46:45 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/

On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 01:55:21PM -0400, Trampas wrote:
> Additionally you could have the compiler implement polymorphism
> while keeping C code. For example you could at compile time check
> variables types and conditionally create code.

    I believe that the Linux kernel actually uses compile time object
oriented behavior like you are describing. This is a cool idea because
there is no performance penalty once the code is compiled.
    I would argue that there is a big difference between 'static OOP'
and 'dynamic OOP'. It seems like few OO languages allow dynamic OO
behavior where classes and objects can change at run time, Ruby is an
example of a language that does do this. All of the static OO behavior
for a program can be known at compile time and so should be
implementable with some type of "meta" front-end like you have


Where did the universe come from?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]