Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/05/17/17:38:02
Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
>
> Alexei A. Frounze <alex DOT fru AT mtu-net DOT ru> wrote:
>
> > I can define my own classes instead. Just a C++ compiler is needed, no C++
> > library. Stream I/O could be implemented w/o C++ library, complex stuff,
> > strings, etc. can also be done w/o that library.
>
> Sure :-(. And you would be willing and able to write your own I/O
> library for all of the dozens of computing platforms out there
> yourself, wouldn't you? Or use libraries written by others, which
> almost certainly would end up incompatible with each other, on
> different platforms?
>
> Sorry, Alexei, but I think you must have misunderstood a fundamental
> detail about what high-level programming languages are meant for. And
> C++ is just about as high-level as it gets.
Nope. :) I simply flame because C++ library implementations are different in
different compilers. That's the main problem that makes me angry. I don't
understand why C++ library is standartized so long. Seems people started
inventing it w/o thinking of portability and standards so standard is
released after C++ is out. Or the standard changes all the time itself. :(
> A big part of the game is
> that *not* every programmer re-invents the wheel of how to do I/O on
> his target machine. Without code-reusability (as in: every program can
> use a library of support functionality), software engineering would be
> in even worse a state today than it already is.
>
> The particular problem with the C++ standard library is that it's
> *huge*, and very hard to implement correctly. Many compiler/library
> implementors are still struggling to get it right.
Sure I don't want to and I won't make a replacement for all the C/C++
library functions. I'm not crazy. :) It's just a humor about using
*standard* things. :)
> > So why should I use C++ library, if it's not standartized?
>
> It *is* standardized. But most of the compilers haven't implemented
> all of that standard, yet.
Is standard or is <being> standartized? Why so long?
> > Btw, when C++ was invented? How long we have it w/o of standard?
>
> At least half a decade. Maybe 10 years. To give some numbers:
> Borland's first 'big' C++ compiler, BC++3.1, dates back 1992 or so.
>
> The key problem is that the definition of the language itself and also
> the library has constantly been changing all the time. It never really
> came to a halt until the ratification of the ISO standard late in
> 1998. This kept the compiler writers extremely busy all the time if
> they wanted to keep up with the state of the art.
>
> > size_t is not a problem. Btw, what so I need size_t for, if both size_t and
> > int equal the same machine word?
>
> *If*. But how on earth is a program supposed to know if that condition
> holds, on the compiler it's being put through?
I don't understand your phrase. Please tell it in other words, if possible.
bye.
Alexei A. Frounze
-----------------------------------------
Homepage: http://alexfru.chat.ru
Mirror: http://members.xoom.com/alexfru
- Raw text -