From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: cjolley@oz.sunflower.org (Charles A. Jolley) Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1997/02/10 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 217932895 references: organization: HACS Design Group newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1997-02-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: > Well, who am I to judge.. but in my view C++ is basically C with the > capability to add functions to structs. Before I tried C++, I would > bundle pointers to functions in my C-structs to fake some kind of > OO-like bundling of similar functions ;) C++ take this a major > step further by actually bundling data and functions together > in a struct. But that is what classes are in C++: just enhanced > structs! C++ actually does not bundle code with the structs. If a member function is not virtual, the compiler will just binds a obj.foo() reference to its obj::foo() counterpart. On the other hand, if a member function is virtual, then function pointers, like you mentioned above, are used. Anyway, just a minor detail; they're still just glorified structs. ;) -Charles -Charles Jolley cjolley@oz.sunflower.org ------------------------------- HACS Design Group "...there is a better way..." -------------------------------