home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.iconn.net!news
- From: thecrow@iconn.net (The Crow)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.tools.misc
- Subject: Re: C++ with Zapp vs. Delphi
- Date: 9 Jan 1996 00:43:49 GMT
- Organization: I rule the world
- Message-ID: <4csdo8$308@news.iconn.net>
- References: <4cfor8$qno@picasso.op.net> <4cjthe$23t@canton.charm.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: st-ts00-03.iconn.net
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
- X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6
-
- In article <4cjthe$23t@canton.charm.net>, tekhed@charm.net╚ says...
- >
- >Bruce Momjian (root@candle.pha.pa.us) wrote:
- >: Pascal is simpler, but C++ is more powerful/flexible.
- >
- >: Is this a fair comparison?
- >
- >According to the manuals, you can have assembler blocks in Delphi. To me
- >this would make the "flexibility" limit no less than any other language.
- >Correct me if I'm wrong.
- >
- >
-
- DELPHI ran a sample program I posted a while ago that was pure number-crunching
- a bit faster than did Borland C++, so the Power argument is pretty dead too.
- Borland pretty much turned Pascal into C with different names for things. It is
- *easier* to be more flexible with C, and you dont have to type as much (but it
- is more cryptic at the same time) PASCAL usually makes smaller EXEs for
- whatever reason. It probably evens out once programs get large though.
-
- The Crow - thecrow@iconn.net
- "It can't rain all the time"
- -Kryptology
-
-