Re: OOP Language for OS Development

[Calum <calum.bulk@ntlworld.com>]

Philippe Ribet wrote:

> Calum wrote:
> 
>> Philippe Ribet wrote:
>>
>>> EventHelix.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> At this point C++ would seem to be the best choice. I don't think 
>>>> any other
>>>> language would match C++ in performance and power.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Do you at least ever heard of Eiffel? I would say that C++ is far 
>>> from matching Eiffel power.
>>
>>
>>
>> In terms of "raw power", both languages are Turing powerful (if we 
>> ignore the "can a finite computer be Turing complete" pedentry).  So 
>> power in what sense?  What's really nice and neat to do in Eiffel that 
>> is difficult in C++?  Give some source code, or at the very least a 
>> link to an article.
> 
> 
> It's obvious here that language power means expressivity.

I am in no doubt that Eiffel is cleaner safer language, however that's 
not quite the same as power.

So what can you express in Eiffel that cannot be expressed in C++? 
[Actually, resolving name-clashes in multiple inheritance is one, 
contracts is another.]  But are these fundamentally difficult in C++, or 
just a little uglier?

>> Can for example Eiffel implement its own allocators, or is its type 
>> system itself Turing complete (C++ templates)?
> 
> 
> Could you please re-formulate questions about allocators and type 
> system? I do not understand what you mean, sorry.

C++ allows you to specify where in memory an object resides.  This is a 
low-level feature that most people would not use, but gives C-like 
performance since you can cache-localize data, and implement more 
efficient memory managers where you know the allocation patterns.

Are parameterized types in Eiffel as flexible as those in C++?