Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25890

Re: Java vs C++

Show all headers | View raw

On 02/07/2011 03:15 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 06-02-2011 20:55, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> In message<4d4e7634$0$81475$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>, Silvio wrote:
>>> Oh, I remember how well C++ and its undefined sizes of things served us
>>> when we had to port heaps of code from 16-bit to 32-bit.
>
> It is 8086 architecture not 80286 architecture.
>
>> By “16-bit” I take it you specifically mean “Windows/Intel 16-bit”,
>> i.e. the
>> segmented 80286 architecture (spit). That was the only major 16-bit
>> architecture I’m aware of that made portability difficult.
>
> Windows has nothing to do with CPU architecture.
>
> And the problem Silvio talks about (undefined sizes) is
> not related to segmented memory.
>
> Arne
>
>
>
Absolutely correct. It is very easy to write potentially broken C++ 
programs that run perfectly fine on a certain architecture compiled with 
a certain C++ compiler using a certain set of compiler options.

Bad programs may depend on different types of invalid assumptions. To 
name a few: assume sizeof(T)==sizeof(U), assume char is signed/unsigned, 
assume bitfields are signed/unsigned, make assumptions about struct 
alignment.

For certain APIs (MS Windows conatins lots of them) struct layout 
assumpations are essential. Since there was no standard way of 
expressing such assumtions code could easily break just by changing some 
compiler options. For that reason, each C++ distro came with its own 
Windows header files.

Perhaps things have improved since I moved away from C++ in '99.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-06 00:15 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 14:55 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 21:15 -0500
      Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> - 2011-02-09 15:48 +1100
        Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-09 00:15 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 22:13 -0500
        Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-11 13:11 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> - 2011-02-08 09:00 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> - 2011-02-08 14:13 +1100
        Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 20:31 +1300
        Re: [OT] Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> - 2011-02-08 16:53 +1100
          Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 20:32 +1300
        [OT] Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-07 23:19 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Silvio <silvio@moc.com> - 2011-02-07 18:58 +0100
        Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:59 -0500
        Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 15:59 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 22:09 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 15:57 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 16:00 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 22:07 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-06 21:22 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-05 09:26 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-06 14:30 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-06 20:42 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-07 21:03 -0800
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 14:51 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Wojtek <nowhere@a.com> - 2011-02-07 20:43 -0800
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 12:54 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 21:08 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 15:10 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 19:57 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 14:51 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-05 09:24 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 09:28 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 15:20 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-02-06 10:55 -0800
  Re: Java vs C++ Pitch <mail@fake.info> - 2011-02-05 13:01 +0100
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-06 01:24 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-05 09:38 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-05 09:32 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Jef <e70838@gmail.com> - 2011-02-09 04:34 -0800
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 21:12 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 14:53 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 09:30 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Silvio <silvio@moc.com> - 2011-02-05 15:02 +0100
  Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-05 10:49 -0500

csiph-web