C++/CLI limitations?
in [C++]
|
Prev: Exceptions
Next: C++ Concepts
From: Bo Persson on 19 Sep 2005 02:17 "David F" <David-White(a)earthlink.net> skrev i meddelandet news:OTYWe.11301$4P5.1239(a)newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net... > > I think that you and Ismail are both right. Ismail is technically > right, GC > makes that pointer-to-member impossible like it makes many other > ISO C++ standard impossible. You are right because the whole thing > called GC being imposed on a programmer is one big compatibility > flap. > > Computer science theory proved already decades ago that altogether, > GC is more of a liability than an asset and I never heard that there > were > new theortical revelations here. If there were, I thank in advance > for > pointing me to such news. Besides, there are many GC packages > available in the market for C++ for those who OPT for it, and w/o > forcing one to use it and worse, modifying the language as MS did. > It is not only GC that is the trouble. There are semantic differences as well, like not allowing you to override private member functions. ECMA C++/CLR and ISO C++ are two totally different languages. > > Just to make it clear, I am happy to use several MS products. > When they came out with Word 2.0, I dumpped Word Perfect in no time. > Even though VS IDE contains an > important piece, Windows Forms, that was stolen from Borland's IDE > (what > good ORIGINAL work came out of MS?), and generally I prefer > originals > over immitations, It isn't an imitation, it is the original. MS has the same designer Borland once had. http://msdn.microsoft.com/vcsharp/homepageheadlines/hejlsberg/default.aspx >From Turbo Pascal to C#... Bo Persson [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
From: Ismail Pazarbasi on 19 Sep 2005 02:43 > Bad luck. Mono already runs CLI programs and GCC seems just one step >away from compiling C++ to CLI code: Unfortunately, some (well, I think most) applications running on Windows cannot be used with Mono, because they depend on native DLLs. ..NET is non-portable at all. Rotor was a sample that doesn't include Windows Forms and many more libraries. For the ECMA standard, it's a good improvement, actually. Microsoft's standardization effort grabbed my attention, too. Having an open standard is good, but having this standard implicitly depend on another platform, which's not a standard, is bad. I refer to the native DLL case I mentioned above. Ismail [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
From: kanze on 19 Sep 2005 07:43 David F wrote: > Computer science theory proved already decades ago that > altogether, GC is more of a liability than an asset Could you indicate some references? All of the software engineering literature I'm familiar with indicates that garbage collection is a good thing, and that seems to line up with my personal experience -- I'm more productive using C++ with garbage collection than without. -- James Kanze GABI Software Conseils en informatique orient?e objet/ Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung 9 place S?mard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'?cole, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34 [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
From: Hyman Rosen on 19 Sep 2005 13:16 Ismail Pazarbasi wrote: > The whole idea that ISO C++ states "do not move pointers", > and the whole idea of GC is to "reclaim memory". So the > problem is, in fact, the GC implementation is incompatible > with ISO C++ Why do you think that reclaiming memory is incompatible with not moving pointers? [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
From: Gerhard Menzl on 19 Sep 2005 13:15
Bo Persson wrote: > It is not only GC that is the trouble. There are semantic differences > as well, like not allowing you to override private member functions. Not to mention that it makes you forget everything you have learned about const-correctness. -- Gerhard Menzl #dogma int main () Humans may reply by replacing the thermal post part of my e-mail address with "kapsch" and the top level domain part with "net". [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ] |