>
> -Original Message-
> From: fred smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 1999 11:54 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: recipient.list.not.shown
> Subject: Re: question about linux and c
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 1999 at 10:53:13AM -070
On Thu, Nov 25, 1999 at 01:53:32PM -0500, fred smith wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 1999 at 10:53:13AM -0700, patrick wrote:
> > I have been wondering of late why it is that much of
> > the heart of linux and many linux apps are written
> > in c rather than c++. Why is this? Why not convert
> > everyt
> My friend mentioned this to her mother...both the mother
> and a coworker thought learning c was funny and a waste
> of time...that c++ was essentially THE language (in that
what is funny is that you really can do better C++ once you know C REALLY
well. C++ is just that - C + 1. You have to k
ay, November 25, 1999 11:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: recipient.list.not.shown
Subject: Re: question about linux and c
On Thu, Nov 25, 1999 at 10:53:13AM -0700, patrick wrote:
> I have been wondering of late why it is that much of
> the heart of linux and many linux apps are written
> in
On Thu, Nov 25, 1999 at 10:53:13AM -0700, patrick wrote:
> I have been wondering of late why it is that much of
> the heart of linux and many linux apps are written
> in c rather than c++. Why is this? Why not convert
> everything over...presumeably c++ allows for tighter,
> more efficient code.
I have been wondering of late why it is that much of
the heart of linux and many linux apps are written
in c rather than c++. Why is this? Why not convert
everything over...presumeably c++ allows for tighter,
more efficient code.
patrick
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubs
