Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 07:59:33 08/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 12, 2004 at 06:17:17, Tord Romstad wrote: >On August 11, 2004 at 18:38:38, Anthony Cozzie wrote: > >>Then, we have C++, which tries to make a high level language out of a low level >>language. Guess what? it _doesn't work_. It is an exercise in stupidity. >>There are two ways to write C++: you can write it as C with a few nice syntax >>features to clean up your code, or you can (as you are evidently advocating) >>write it as an attempted high level language. The only problem with this is that >>you will fail miserably, because you still have to do your own memory >>management, etc. So you end up with the same development time as C and the same >>speed as a high level language. > >Very well said. This is almost exactly how I feel about C++ myself. > >Tord I'm not quite sure I understand you two here. Is the focus still on developing a chess engine, or software development in general? It sounds to me, that you two are basically saying that C++ is more or less a failure. If that's your opinion, that's ok with me. (although I don't agree) Just wanted to clarify things. Sargon
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.