Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: December 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: reqs and languages (was curiosity).
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: reqs and languages (was curiosity).

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Andrew Sutton <ansutton@xxxxxxx>
Cc: freeciv development list <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: reqs and languages (was curiosity).
From: Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:40:33 +0100
Reply-to: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 11:37:53AM -0500, Andrew Sutton wrote:
> 
> 
> so the list boils down to c vs. c++ on the basis of performance and developer 
> familiarity.
> 
> you know what? i went about this wrong. you're supposed to pick the language 
> after you know what the requirements of you system are. the reason being that 
> knowing the requirements will help you pick a language suited to the 
> implementation. we aren't really doing that. we're discussing the finer 
> points of language without a real basis for decision.
> 
> so... here's a short list of requirements. these aren't ranked; they just all 
> bear the same priority.
> 
> - modular
> - OO in nature
> - extensibility
> - performance
> - maintainability
> - highly available server
> - fast server
> - portability
> 
> both c and c++ allow implementations with the above requirements - in as much 
> as the performance of c(++) applications is faster than java applications. 
> however, OO in c is really ugly and defining OO capabilities for c makes the 
> code less readable (e.g. macro casting) and can contribute to the degradation 
> of performance. c++ has portability issues because it hasn't been around as 
> long as c. c and c++ perform equally well (unless you're doing really 
> complicated stuff).
> 
> c++, whether we think so or not, does have standardized tools for common 
> tasks (STL). additionally, c++ wrappers like ACE provide higher availability 
> for different platforms making portability a non-issue for c++.
> 
> build time is a non-issue.
> 
> discussion?

It looks like some people have already an opinion about what language
to use and to don't use. It also looks like aren't able to convince
them. Just make a detailed plan and see how many people join the
proposal.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
  build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying
  to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."
    -- Rich Cook


[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]