On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:04:48 -0400, Dave Robillard wrote > On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 14:44, Robert Jonsson wrote: > > > Getting off topic here, but there's a little more to it than that. 1 > > > Syntactic sugared implementation is much much more preferable to 101 > > > conventions for doing OOP with void pointers. > > > Things like typesafety, getting rid of macros in favour of inline > > > functions. The STL is another real reason to use C++ - the closest we have > > > to a standard for that sort of stuff. UML etc... There are a lot of very > > > practical reasons for using C++. > > > > Ahhh, I fear an outbreak of the unstoppable language zealot virus is imminent! > > Once it gets airborne nothing can stop it! > > > > Ahh, it's probably already to late... I can hear the sound of eager fingers > > tapping on keyboards... save yourselves!! > > I can't say I've ever actually come across a C++ "zealot".. most > seem to have an opinion similar to mine: > > C++ sucks. > > However, it sucks less than anything else I could use to do audio > development on linux right now.
I agree, I didn't mean to come across as a zealot :) dave
