Gevik Babakhani wrote:
I think the better question about all of this is:
What is the problem we are trying to solve?
Providing solutions that are looking for problems doesn't help us.
Sincerely,
Perhaps the current codebase and design in C will serve us for years and
years to come. In fact there is no doubt about that and switching to an OO
design is no easy task. But times change and technologies evolve. So should
any software solution that is hoping to continue and compete with other
competitors of the same kind.
Procedural programming languages like C may have been languages of choice
for many years but they gradually loose developer audience just because of
the reason above. I am afraid PG is no exception here.
That's a two way street. I have far more experience in writing C than
C++. No doubt I could adapt, but it would certainly slow me down for a
while at least.
Frankly, this looks like a solution in search of a problem. When OS
kernels are all written in C++ I might accept that there is a good case,
but I see no sign of anything like that happening.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
