home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- From: nikki@trmphrst.demon.co.uk (Nikki Locke)
- Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!demon!trmphrst.demon.co.uk!nikki
- Subject: Re: "type safety" deemed essential
- Reply-To: nikki@trmphrst.demon.co.uk
- References: <450@genie.UUCP> <725053473snx@trmphrst.demon.co.uk>
- Distribution: world
- X-Mailer: cppnews $Revision: 1.30 $
- Organization: Trumphurst Ltd.
- Lines: 31
- Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:51:46 +0000
- Message-ID: <726346306snx@trmphrst.demon.co.uk>
- Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk
-
- In article <450@genie.UUCP> roger@genie.UUCP (Roger H. Scott) writes:
- > In article <725053473snx@trmphrst.demon.co.uk> nikki@trmphrst.demon.co.uk writes:
- > >In article <448@genie.UUCP> roger@genie.UUCP (Roger H. Scott) writes:
- > >> ... [W]ho has written a non-trivial commercial C++
- > >> application *without* making significant use of either type casting [(T *)]
- > >> or run-time type checking [Bar *bar_p = foo_p->asBar();]?
- > >
- > >Does my Text Mode User Interface Toolkit count ?
- >
- > Not to denegrate tool kits in general in any way, but the short answer is "no".
- > The sorts of code one writes for a general purpose tool kit tend to be
- > rather different than the code one ends up writing for an end application.
- > [It has often seemed to me that C++ has evolved to be more closely tuned
- > to the needs of tool kit, or library, writers than for "end" users.]
- > A non-trivial commercial application *using* the T.M.U.I. kit *would* count,
- > of course.
-
- O.K., then I had better look to see if the main applications I have
- written in C++ (using the toolkit) are non-trivial ...
-
- Application Lines of code
- Toolkit 16000
- Mainframe comms document retrieval 8000
- PC Usenet newsreader/mailer 7000
-
- Do these count as non-trivial ?
- [ Note - lines of code computed by wc. ]
-
- --
- Nikki Locke,Trumphurst Ltd.(PC and Unix consultancy) nikki@trmphrst.demon.co.uk
- trmphrst.demon.co.uk is NOT affiliated with ANY other sites at demon.co.uk.
-