Slow performance compared to C++, ideas?

Simen Kjaeraas simen.kjaras at gmail.com
Mon Jun 3 22:59:32 PDT 2013


On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 07:23:47 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:

> On 6/4/13 1:05 AM, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 06:16:45 +0200, Steven Schveighoffer
>> <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think it is unfair to say most classes are not base classes. This
>>> would mean most classes are marked as final. I don't think they are.
>>> One of the main reasons to use classes in the first place is for
>>> extendability.
>>
>> This is false. Consider this hierarchy: A->B->C, where x->y means 'x
>> derives from y'. There is only one base class (A), and only one class
>> that may be marked final (C). This will often be the case.
>
> You two are in violent agreement. (B is also a base class, in addition  
> to being a derived class.)

Yes and no. I suspected after posting that this argument would appear.
I believe a degradation of jargon has taken place - Manu originally
spoke of foundation classes - classes with many overridable methods.
A in my example is one of these, and I believe that's what Manu meant
when he said 'base class' in the above discussion.


-- 
Simen


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list