[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [DotGNU]cscc symbol table and random question
From: |
Gopal V |
Subject: |
Re: [DotGNU]cscc symbol table and random question |
Date: |
Sat, 8 Feb 2003 00:18:40 +0530 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.2.5i |
If memory serves me right, CH Gowri Kumar wrote:
> ILCoder--the function pointers are members of the structure and later
> intialize the function pointers to the actual functions.
>
> Just thought if we could have a base class with all the pure virtual
> functions and all the new coders derived from that.
Hmm... right now it makes lots of sense to use C because the rest of the
framework is in C :)
Every single bit of OO you add increases size , complexity and speed
penalties to the system. This idea is almost identical to OO , but
without inheritance or constructors or base classes. Which is to say
"virtually no overhead" :).
I totally mis-interpreted the "cscc" reference there and jumped the
gun on TreeCC :)
Gopal
--
The difference between insanity and genius is measured by success
- [DotGNU]cscc symbol table and random question, CH Gowri Kumar, 2003/02/07
- Re: [DotGNU]cscc symbol table and random question, Gopal V, 2003/02/07
- Re: [DotGNU]cscc symbol table and random question, CH Gowri Kumar, 2003/02/07
- Re: [DotGNU]cscc symbol table and random question,
Gopal V <=
- Re: [DotGNU]random question, CH Gowri Kumar, 2003/02/07
- RE: [DotGNU]random question, Aditya P. Bansod, 2003/02/07
- Re: [DotGNU]random question, j_post, 2003/02/07
- RE: [DotGNU]random question, Thong \(Tum\) Nguyen, 2003/02/07
- Re: [DotGNU]random question, j_post, 2003/02/08
- RE: [DotGNU]random question, Thong \(Tum\) Nguyen, 2003/02/08
- Re: [DotGNU]random question, j_post, 2003/02/08
- Re: [DotGNU]random question, Gopal V, 2003/02/08
- RE: [DotGNU]random question, Thong \(Tum\) Nguyen, 2003/02/08
- Re: [DotGNU]random question, minddog, 2003/02/08