I have been following flightgear-devel for months now, but this is my first
post...
Please have the respect to refer to the language by its correct name.
I think we all understand that C and C++ are very different languages -
other than some low-level intrinsic operators, and some basic syntactic
similarities, they don't really have that much in common at all.
But your insistence on using the somewhat snide "c--" appellation belies a
non-objective attitude and a myopic arrogance bereft of perspective.
Of course one should use reference counted objects in a language that
supports them, but C does not. That does not make it a "bad" language.
Just a different one.
gl
On Jan 19, 2008 4:51 PM, John Denker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 01/19/2008 02:22 PM, Jon S. Berndt wrote in part:
> > .... Pushing an object instance onto a vector is a bad idea, as a proper
> > copy constructor must then be created,
>
> Well ... that is exactly the point I'm trying to discuss.
>
> IMHO if you are going to write 23,000 lines of c++, it
> might be worth your trouble to figure out how to write a
> copy constructor. It ain't that tricky. You only need
> to figure it out once, and then you can use the technique
> over and over again.
>
> Actually you usually need four things: the basic
> constructor, the copy constructor, the assignment
> operator, and the destructor. Or just use something
> like ref_ptr.
>
> You might want to take a look at
>
> http://andesengineering.com/OSG_ProducerArticles/RefPointers/RefPointers.html
> which says in part: "the concept of reference counted
> objects will add years to your life in the long run."
>
> I am aware that JSBsim doesn't want to have an OSG
> dependence, but there are plenty of ways of having
> reference-counted objects without OSG dependence.
>
> C++ was invented for a reason.
>
> > We create instances of engines
> > and other components at runtime and place pointers to those objects in
> the
> > vector. Each object instance is [supposed to be] properly destroyed as
> the
> > sim shuts down.
>
> Computers are good at counting things. Why not let the
> computer keep track of the reference count?
>
> For example, stdlib lets you have strings, and then lets
> you have lists of strings, maps from strings to strings,
> et cetera. Stdlib does all the memory management so
> that the memory used by the string is freed when the
> last reference to the string goes away.
>
> Why not set it up so that we can have a std::list of
> engines? Reference-counted objects make that easy.
> It's not rocket science.
>
> I would say that pushing an object (such as an engine)
> onto a list is a good idea. A very good idea.
>
> C++ was invented for a reason.
>
> Switching from c-- to c++ does *not* consist of replacing
> malloc with new and replacing free with delete.
>
> Using automatic variables makes the code more reliable,
> and reduces the burden on those who want to read, debug,
> maintain, re-use, and/or extend the code.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
