🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <timm.714755187@void> timm@void.ncsa.uiuc.edu (Tim McClarren)  
writes:
>>andy@uh.msc.edu (Andrew Hollenbeck) writes:
>>
>>>I've used C++ and would like to know what distinguishes Objective-C from  
C++. 
>>>The Objective-C FAQ (Q6/A6) only indicates features that C++ contains that
>>>Objective-C lacks.  What features of Objective-C make it "better"?
>>
>>>C++ is certainly more popular, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is
>>>better.  You can walk into any bookstore and find a couple dozen C++ books,  
but I
>>>have yet to find a single Objective-C book in those stores.
>>
>>There aren't any decent Objective books...don't waste your money on
>>the Weiner and Pinson book.  It's terrible.
>>
>>Anyways, the one main characteristic that distinguishes Objective from
>>C++ is in the way that they do dispatch.  Objective's objects have a
>>field that indicates what class said object belongs to (called "isa").
>>Messages are sent by hashing on the selector.  Thus, you can find out
>>at run-time whether or not a particular object will respond to a given
>>message.  C++ doesn't know much about an object at all at run-time,
>>all it has is a ptr. to a v-table.  If you've ever seen/used SmallTalk,
>>Objective is similar to it.
>>
>>I like that object model better, but I really wish Objective allowed
>>you to declare things in-line instead of at the top of a block, like
>>C++ allows.  The other C++ features I can live without (MI, operator-
>>overloading, etc.)
>>
>>-- 
>>Tim McClarren     | "...a bajillion brilliant Jobsian lithium licks."
>>timm@ncsa.uiuc.edu|
>>(217)244-0015     |

As a neophyte I would agree and also add that the Obj-C learning curve is 
not as steep as C++.  Obj-C adds only a handfull of extensions to 
the C language.  Also it's easier to read and a bit more elegant
in general.  
--
Ronald Pomeroy
Advanced Micro Devices
CAM Applications Group
rpomeroy@aunext3.amd.com