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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #349625

Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 12:02:33 +1000
Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> wrote:

> On 12/04/16 12:50, John Gohde wrote:
> > On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 10:23:50 PM UTC-4, Ron House wrote:  
> >> On 12/04/16 11:47, John Gohde wrote:  
> >>> On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 9:30:03 PM UTC-4, Ron House wrote:  
> >>>> On 11/04/16 23:22, John Gohde wrote:
> >>>>  
> >>>>> Anybody who has ever studied the issue knows that OOPs
> >>>>> programming eats up tons of computer resources under the theory
> >>>>> that programmer time is more valuable than hardware.  
> >>>>
> >>>> So wrong. Some OO languages such as Smalltalk use lookup tables,
> >>>> which are inherently slow. But C++ uses indexed despatch tables,
> >>>> called virtual tables, to find addresses of polymorphic functions
> >>>> with a single addition operation. The tables themselves are of
> >>>> trivial size, since only one table exists per class, not per
> >>>> object, although each object contains exactly one pointer to the
> >>>> appropriate VT. The time overhead is O(1), and trivial, compared
> >>>> to the massive productivity boost. In fact, anyone trying to
> >>>> "roll your own" with C is much more likely to waste even more
> >>>> time and space by using less optimal (or wrong!) one-off methods
> >>>> compared to the finely honed algorithms in the C++ library.  
> ...
> 
> > You are arguing over what I have disclosed in a hidden footnote in
> > extreme detail.  
> 
> I was telling you, as an expert, in "extreme detail" why C++ is not a 
> "bloated" OO language - in either time or space. This is a discussion 
> group. If you have a counter to my explanation, then give it. No one
> is going to go off reading vast amounts of off-group, most likely 
> irrelevant material. If there is a counter to my explanation in that 
> material, then YOU tell the readers what it is. Other than that, I
> think every serious reader here can see the force of my explanation.
> 
> Anyway, I write here for the serious enquirer, not for fools like you.
> 
> And what use is a "HIDDEN" footnote??!! You are one seriously ill
> puppy. Further nonsense from you will be ignored. But I am fair. If
> you can offer a reasoned counter to my explanation above, I'll answer
> it.
> 

I think that Gohde knows nothing about OOP and C++. He can't run KDE 4
on his old junk therefore he complains...
But he didn't tried KDE 5 which is not bloated at all.
Actually qt5 is less heavy than gtk3, therefore authors of LXDE moved
to qt5 instead of gtk3.

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 19:02 -0700
  Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-11 04:23 +0200
    KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 19:57 -0700
      Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-11 07:24 +0200
        OOPs is Bloated, Poops! John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 03:07 -0700
        Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-11 08:00 -0400
          Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 05:26 -0700
            Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 06:19 -0700
            Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-11 09:38 -0400
          Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 06:16 -0700
          Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-11 17:04 +0200
            Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-11 11:59 -0400
      Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 22:27 -0700
        Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-11 07:45 +0200
          Re: KDE is bloated cause it is compiled with C++ rather than C Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 23:15 -0700
        Bow down when you speak to your Moi. I am now a noted Linux Publisher. John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 03:08 -0700
  Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-10 22:24 -0400
    DFS and Two horny muscle armies secretly pounding some ass DFS <nospam@dfs.cum> - 2016-04-11 00:24 -0500
  Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-11 12:44 +0200
    Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 03:53 -0700
    Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-11 12:49 +0100
      Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 06:22 -0700
        Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 08:09 -0700
          Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-11 17:12 +0200
            Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-11 13:01 -0400
              Re: KDE is both bloated & Sucks because it written with C++ rather than C Omar <omarsayeed@linuxmail.org> - 2016-04-11 13:07 -0400
              OOPs is Bloated, Poops! John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 11:34 -0700
                Re: OOPs is Bloated, Poops! Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 18:14 -0700
                Re: OOPs is Bloated, Poops! John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 18:42 -0700
        Ignorant comments about C++ and C Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> - 2016-04-12 11:30 +1000
          Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Omar <omarsayeed@linuxmail.org> - 2016-04-11 21:39 -0400
          Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 18:47 -0700
            Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> - 2016-04-12 12:23 +1000
              OOP is as good an explanation as to why KDE is bloated, as any John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 19:50 -0700
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> - 2016-04-13 12:02 +1000
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-13 04:19 +0200
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 00:57 -0700
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> - 2016-04-13 19:48 +1000
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 04:41 -0700
              Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-12 04:48 +0000
              Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-12 07:00 -0500
              Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-12 13:33 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Omar <omarsayeed@linuxmail.org> - 2016-04-12 13:39 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> - 2016-04-13 12:29 +1000
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-12 22:43 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> - 2016-04-13 19:57 +1000
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-13 08:58 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-13 11:17 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Silver Slimer <linux@sucks.balls> - 2016-04-13 11:22 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-14 05:44 +0000
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-13 05:47 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> - 2016-04-13 20:01 +1000
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-13 08:44 -0500
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Silver Slimer <linux@sucks.balls> - 2016-04-13 09:58 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-13 11:15 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-13 12:43 -0500
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Silver Slimer <linux@sucks.balls> - 2016-04-13 14:11 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-13 17:14 -0400
                Re: Ignorant comments about C++ and C Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> - 2016-04-14 11:49 +1000
          It is 16+ million lines of code with 15,000 lines being merged into it everyday. One Linux Kernel for virtually all computer architectures John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 04:57 -0700
            Re: It is 16+ million lines of code with 15,000 lines being merged into it everyday. One Linux Kernel for virtually all computer architectures Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-15 06:56 -0700
              Re: It is 16+ million lines of code with 15,000 lines being merged into it everyday. One Linux Kernel for virtually all computer architectures Omar <omarsayeed@linuxmail.org> - 2016-04-15 09:59 -0400
                Re: It is 16+ million lines of code with 15,000 lines being merged into it everyday. One Linux Kernel for virtually all computer architectures Silver Slimer <linux@shit.is> - 2016-04-15 10:42 -0400
                Re: It is 16+ million lines of code with 15,000 lines being merged into it everyday. One Linux Kernel for virtually all computer architectures Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 08:05 -0700
                Re: It is 16+ million lines of code with 15,000 lines being merged into it everyday. One Linux Kernel for virtually all computer architectures Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-15 17:15 +0200
                Re: It is 16+ million lines of code with 15,000 lines being merged into it everyday. One Linux Kernel for virtually all computer architectures Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-15 08:22 -0700
                Re: It is 16+ million lines of code with 15,000 lines being merged into it everyday. One Linux Kernel for virtually all computer architectures John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 08:20 -0700

csiph-web