"Ondrej Certik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > I don't know which C++ you're talking about, but the one that I use on | > daily basis and work on has lists (std::list), dictionaries (std::map, | > std::multimap, etc.), has many garbage collectors as libraries with | > a popular one freely available from Hans Boehm's web site -- industrial | > strengh. You don't have to use pointers in C++ if you don't need to. | > Many languages claim they don't have pointers, but represent | > everything as pointers. You can have everything dynamic in C++ if | > that really is hat you want. And, by the way it has a library for | > easly interfacing with Python -- check out Boost.Python from Boost. | > | > Let's our ignorance not interfer with reality. | | I also use C++ frequently, Boot.Python is very, very slow to compile, | better is to use SWIG. Hans Boehm garbage collector is of course a | nice thing, but the STL lists, map and stuff is very cumbersome to use | compared to python.
That is a remarkably different statement that the ones you made earlier. # Well, at least Python and Ruby are much higher level than C++ (there # are lists, dictionaries, garbage collector, no pointers, it's dynamic, # etc.). And also many times slower. I should have guessed. | Compare for example GiNaC and SymPy's | implementation of the same algorithms - SymPy is like 1/2 (or even | more) smaller, because C++ is very, very verbose. Now, you're elevating the properties of a particular library to that of a language and language library. I'll refrain from qualifying that process and leave it at that. -- Gaby _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
