Re: Object Orientation question

Hi Koert,

Actually, no, your answer doesn't help at all but it made for entertaining reading and had a couple of good points. :)

True, C++ compilers run through a bunch of "C" files. (I can see it on a step through) And I agree that there are 'probably' not any OO Assemblers. (that would ultimately be pointless, I think.) Where does that leave us? I should probably direct the question to a C++ group since it is a chicken/egg sort of question.

Thanks just the same.

Don

"koert54" <koert54_at_nospam.com> wrote in message news:A%SM7.8664$jD3.2695041206_at_hestia.telenet-ops.be...
> So what ? Most C++ compilers generated C code as an intermediate step !
Does
> this mean C++ is not really object oriented ? (welllll let's
> not discuss that :-) )
> In the end, it all results in native assembler code - I never heard of OO
> Assembler - did you ?
> In a previous life I used to program cross compilers - I once rewrote a
> back-end generating imperative C code (using a massive amount of GOTOs)
into
> a back-end generating OO Java (with no GOTOs at all (goto is a reserved
word
> but not implemented in java :-) !) ....
> I hope this answered your question ?
>
> koert
>
>
> "D" <asd_at_asdf.com> wrote in message
> news:EB40DCB62E92E2CA.84081C89E9DAF8B7.8790309C4CC04EA6_at_lp.airnews.net...
> > Hi Group,
> >
> > As I understand it Oracle 8 or greater denormalizes tables to acheive
> object
> > orientation. I also understand that most, if not all, of Oracle was
> written
> > in C (presumably ANSI C). C is not an object oriented language. So how
> could
> > a non-object oriented, procedural language create a system that is at
some
> > level, object oriented?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Don
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Thu Nov 29 2001 - 10:23:25 CST