Algol vs Fortran was RE: VHDL vs Verilog
pat at computer-refuge.org
Tue Feb 9 08:14:28 CST 2010
On Tuesday 09 February 2010, Dave McGuire wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2010, at 7:32 PM, N0body H0me wrote:
> >>> Here, here. The thing that impressed me about FORTRAN (well, as
> >>> as science major, anyway) was that it could do complex numbers as
> >>> a *NATIVE* datatype!! Now, I know for you OOP and C++ guys,
> >>> custom, exotic datatypes are a dime a dozen. But in 1980, I was
> >>> sure glad I could do complex math without all of the extra
> >>> baggage that would have been necessary if I had to use, say,
> >>> BASIC-Plus.
> >> Yeah, but how often do those C++ custom exotic datatypes map to
> >> real datatypes supported by the hardware? (in other words, which
> >> ones will actually be FAST?)
> > That's certainly an issue. I wonder how many applications are
> > slower and more overweight due to their being crafted with OOP than
> > they would be if they were coded using more traditional methods.
> "More traditional methods"? Just "the way processors execute
> code" would be a good start. Processors aren't object-oriented in
> nature. This is one of the reasons why we have computers with multi-
> GHz processors that barely get out of their own way. The constructs
> commonly used in OO programming don't come anywhere close to mapping
> to hardware efficiently.
But, isn't the point of programming languages to make it easier for the
programmer to create programs? Computers are fast; people are slow.
Have you ever tried writing code against GTK (not-quite-OOP jammed into
C) vs Qt (real OOP using C++)? GTK is such a pile of sh*t to try to
write code for, in my opinion.
Now, I'm not saying that I appreciate OOP in every case, but it seems to
be darn useful when writing GUI-based applications. Oh, and don't
forget that most of the code on running your favorite Mac was written in
Purdue University Research Computing --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
More information about the cctalk