Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #26021

Re: Java vs C++

From	"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: Java vs C++
Date	2011-02-06 22:52 -0800
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<iio4q9$eer$1@news.eternal-september.org> (permalink)
References	(6 earlier) <iil74u$rac$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d4f042b$0$23753$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <iincuv$ot9$1@news.belwue.de> <4d4f4a54$0$23753$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <iio2be$g2f$3@lust.ihug.co.nz>

Show all headers | View raw

"Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote in message 
news:iio2be$g2f$3@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> In message <4d4f4a54$0$23753$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>> On 06-02-2011 19:04, Thomas Richter wrote:
>>
>>> And in C++, a compiler can also> merge template instances because they
>>> are identical, i.e. function alike, i.e. for example they all operate on
>>> pointers.
>>
>> Possible. But if two template usages are compiled separatetly,
>> then it is not possible.
>
> Exercise for the reader: explain why Arne Vajhøj is wrong. For extra 
> credit,
> list the implicit preconceptions that might have led to such a wrong
> conclusion.

Arne is assuming that compilation and linking are separate phases.  This was 
one of the original design goals of C++, as you might recall from 
Stroustrup's _Design and Evolution of C++_: that the C++ compiler produce 
object code that the standard system linker could process. .  It's no longer 
true in many C++ development systems, precisely because templates make that 
impossible to achieve with any efficiency.

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

Thread

Re: Java vs C++ Silvio <silvio@moc.com> - 2011-02-05 18:04 +0100
  Re: Java vs C++ Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-07 16:21 +0800
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 12:28 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 09:22 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-07 17:25 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 16:08 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 12:24 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 15:03 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-06 21:18 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 21:26 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 20:15 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 15:55 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ "javax.swing.JSnarker" <gharriman@boojum.mit.edu> - 2011-02-06 19:54 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2011-02-07 14:57 +0100
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 20:50 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-07 15:54 +0800
  Re: Java vs C++ Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2011-02-07 01:04 +0100
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 20:26 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 19:09 +1300
        Re: Java vs C++ Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-07 07:29 -0500
        Re: Java vs C++ "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-06 22:52 -0800
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 13:32 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2011-02-06 16:35 +0100
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 15:51 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 22:06 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 15:01 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2011-02-07 14:53 +0100
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:52 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-06 13:09 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2011-02-07 00:55 +0100
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 15:00 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-06 21:20 -0500
        Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 15:52 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 21:25 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 20:29 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2011-02-07 00:57 +0100
    Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-06 12:57 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-06 10:09 -0800
      Re: Java vs C++ "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-06 12:07 -0800
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 15:22 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-06 08:11 -0800
    Re: Java vs C++ Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-07 04:41 +0100
  Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-06 21:12 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 12:26 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 15:27 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2011-02-06 16:45 +0100
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 20:51 -0500

csiph-web