On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Freddie Chopin wrote: > Nicolas Pitre pisze: > > What limitations? > > > > I never considered the C language to bare any limitations what so ever. > > You can do much more in C, and with way more control and performance, > > than with most other languages. The inconvenient is that C requires > > better programming skills. > > > > And C is amenable to object oriented programming just fine. > > Now replace "C" with "assembler" - this will still be perfectly true, > but are there any sane ppl who write software for PC in assembly?
Assembler is not portable while C is. And my focus when writing code is rarely restricted to PCs. And C is still more portable than C++ by far. So saying that C is limited is just B/S. > Why everyone sees only the bad sides of C++ and completely forgets the > good ones? Templates? Stronger compilation-time-error-checks? Easier > error handling? Easier abstraction? Easier polymorphism? Easier - well - > everything? Probably because the bad sides of C++ are just too easy to run into. Personally, I don't see the "bad sides" of C++. I simply don't care about C++ at all as I don't need it. And incidentally I don't see the need for C++ for OpenOCD either. But this is Open Source and anyone who feels differently can fork the code and make it fully C++. As far as my own contributions go, they will be directed to the C version only. Nicolas _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
