Is C++ really used ?

Peter Brueckner <peter@bj-ig.de>
4 May 1997 22:39:41 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: Is C++ really used ? jacobs@darwin.cwru.edu (Kevin Jacobs) (1997-04-30)
Re: Is C++ really used ? salomon@silver.cs.umanitoba.ca (1997-05-04)
Re: Is C++ really used ? krk@cygnus.com (Kim Knuttila) (1997-05-04)
Re: Is C++ really used ? jlilley@empathy.com (John Lilley) (1997-05-04)
Re: Is C++ really used ? dwight@pentasoft.com (1997-05-04)
Re: Is C++ really used ? cdg@nullstone.com (Christopher Glaeser) (1997-05-04)
Is C++ really used ? peter@bj-ig.de (Peter Brueckner) (1997-05-04)
Re: Is C++ really used ? danwang@nordica.CS.Princeton.EDU (1997-05-07)
Re: Is C++ really used ? kbreinho@bsquare.com (Keith L. Breinholt) (1997-05-08)
Re: Is C++ really used ? geert@sun3.iaf.nl (1997-05-08)
Re: Is C++ really used ? David.Monniaux@ens-lyon.fr (1997-05-08)
Re: Is C++ really used ? chase@world.std.com (David Chase) (1997-05-08)
Re: Is C++ really used ? clark@quarry.zk3.dec.com (1997-05-08)
[7 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Peter Brueckner <peter@bj-ig.de>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 4 May 1997 22:39:41 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 97-04-156
Keywords: C++, practice

> Is C++ so bad for compilers, after all I'm using it and it seems
> that everyone else is, so why aren't the books ?


Since year we use C++ for our compilers and we see many advantages:


  1. Decoupeling of stages and informations
  2. Less complexity in implementation of ''specials''.
  3. Less errors.
  4. Reusable Components.
  5. Replacable Implentations.


Peter


--
Peter Brueckner, Brueckner&Jarosch Ing.-GmbH Erfurt, Germany 99084 Erfurt
Andreasstr. 37, TEL +49=361-64318.11, FAX .12, EMail peter@bj-ig.de,-42-
--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.