On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 16:06:34 +0200 Roger Oberholtzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 18:58:12 -0500 > "Richard R. Sivernell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I would suggest that you not use C, but C++ as this is much better for the > > reusability > > of source code. C is old coding. C++ is going to give you the greatest > > speed after ass > > lang. > > Ummm... > > No flame war here (please!), but this is all (I think) a matter of coding > style. I have seen lots of C++ code that was so bad I would hate to suggest > it be reused. And some C code that has a decent API so that it can easily be > reused. Not in the C++ sense, but in a pratical sense. > > I just had to comment. I will say no more. > Roger You are absolutely correct, they are turning out Cop Si people who can not write code nor do they know how to lay it out. I know I have had to fix a lot of it. But properly written not only syntax, but for rock solid use, makes all the arguments for it proper. Other than that C++ will be pile of over stuffed crap. No flame here, I just understand what you are saying. Cheers -- Rick Sivernell Dallas, Texas 75287 972 306-2296 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Caldera Open Linux eWorkStation 3.1.1 Registered Linux User .~. / v \ /( _ )\ ^ ^ In Linux we trust! _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
