Gevik Babakhani wrote:
>> I think the better question about all of this is:
>> What is the problem we are trying to solve?
>> Providing solutions that are looking for problems doesn't help us.
>> Sincerely,
>>
>
> Perhaps the current codebase and design in C will serve us for years and
> years to come. In fact there is no doubt about that and switching to an OO
> design is no easy task. But times change and technologies evolve. So should
> any software solution that is hoping to continue and compete with other
> competitors of the same kind.
>
> Procedural programming languages like C may have been languages of choice
> for many years but they gradually loose developer audience just because of
> the reason above. I am afraid PG is no exception here.
>
>
That's a two way street. I have far more experience in writing C than
C++. No doubt I could adapt, but it would certainly slow me down for a
while at least.
Frankly, this looks like a solution in search of a problem. When OS
kernels are all written in C++ I might accept that there is a good case,
but I see no sign of anything like that happening.
cheers
andrew
