Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #76826
| References | (2 earlier) <mailman.13280.1408697414.18130.python-list@python.org> <87fvgoj2i8.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <lt85g5$mlq$1@dont-email.me> <87siko9tlq.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <53F7B870.2010909@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-23 07:49 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: Python vs C++ |
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.13312.1408744179.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 7:38 AM, Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> wrote: > On 08/22/2014 02:06 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >> I tend to think the opposite: C++ barely has a niche left. I definitely >> wouldn't want to use C++ very far from its (very narrow) sweet spot. > > I agree that it's niche is narrowing. But it's still pretty wide and > widely used. Many adobe products are C++, for example. OpenOffice and > LibreOffice is C++. You could argue that's because they are old > projects and were started in C++. But honestly if you were > reimplementing OpenOffice today what would you choose? Python would be > appropriate for certain aspects of OO, such as parts of the UI, macros, > filters, etc. ... Frankly, I wouldn't write OO in anything, because I think the entire concept of a WYSIWYG editor is flawed. Much better to use markup and compile it. But if I were to write something like that, probably what I'd do would be to write a GUI widget in whatever lowish-level language is appropriate (probably C, with most GUI toolkits), and then use a high level language (probably Python or Pike) to build the application. I'm not familiar with all of OO/LO's components, but I believe that model will probably work for all of them (the document editor, obviously; the presentation editor might be done a bit differently, but it'd still work this way; the spreadsheet quite possibly doesn't even need a custom widget; etc). >> My disillusionment with C++ came from the language's inability to >> represent callbacks. C can do it (void *), C# can do it (delegates), >> Java can do it (anonymous inner classes), Python can do it (methods), >> Scheme can do it (closures). > > C++ can do it quite well, actually. Maybe not quite as nicely as > Python. But boost and libsigc++ both offer nice, type-safe ways to > implement signals and slots. You can pass references to a callback > around in an easy, safe way. My main issue with callbacks in either C or C++ is that functions aren't first-class objects. You can pass function pointers around (and you don't need (void *) to do it, you can use typed function pointers just fine), but you can't actually construct a function at run-time. ChrisA
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Python vs C++ David Palao <dpalao.python@gmail.com> - 2014-08-21 14:54 +0200
Re: Python vs C++ wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-08-21 07:08 -0700
Re: Python vs C++ Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-08-21 07:10 -0700
Re: Python vs C++ Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-08-21 14:59 +0000
Re: Python vs C++ Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-08-21 23:12 -0400
Re: Python vs C++ Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-08-22 10:05 +0200
Re: Python vs C++ Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-22 18:50 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-22 12:29 +0300
Re: Python vs C++ "Neil D. Cerutti" <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2014-08-22 08:51 -0400
Re: Python vs C++ Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-08-22 07:58 -0500
Re: Python vs C++ Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-22 20:16 +0300
Re: Python vs C++ mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2014-08-23 17:47 +0100
Re: Python vs C++ Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-23 19:54 +0300
Re: Python vs C++ Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-22 23:00 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-08-22 21:25 +0200
Re: Python vs C++ Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2014-08-22 21:58 +0200
Re: Python vs C++ Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-22 23:06 +0300
Re: Python vs C++ Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2014-08-22 15:38 -0600
Re: Python vs C++ wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-08-23 03:00 -0700
Re: Python vs C++ Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-23 07:49 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-08-23 05:38 -0700
Re: Python vs C++ Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-23 23:00 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-08-23 08:02 -0600
Re: Python vs C++ Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-08-23 07:21 -0700
Re: Python vs C++ Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-08-23 16:51 -0400
Re: Python vs C++ Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-24 00:21 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-08-23 15:09 -0400
Re: Python vs C++ Joseph Martinot-Lagarde <joseph.martinot-lagarde@m4x.org> - 2014-08-24 14:54 +0200
Re: Python vs C++ "Neil D. Cerutti" <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2014-08-25 09:01 -0400
Re: Python vs C++ Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2014-08-22 15:56 -0600
Re: Python vs C++ Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-23 08:00 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-23 10:27 +0300
Re: Python vs C++ dieter <dieter@handshake.de> - 2014-08-23 07:56 +0200
Re: Python vs C++ Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-23 16:11 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ Paul Rudin <paul.nospam@rudin.co.uk> - 2014-08-23 08:36 +0100
Re: Python vs C++ Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-23 18:04 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ dieter <dieter@handshake.de> - 2014-08-23 07:48 +0200
csiph-web