Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >> Warp wrote:
> >>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >>>> It just doesn't give you the same benefits that doing it with 
> >>>> Java does, due to the nature of the compilation process and object code 
> >>>> storage formats.
> >>>   What benefits are those?
> > 
> >> Strongly typed separate compilation units, and strongly typed dynamic 
> >> loading, for two.
> > 
> >   I don't understand what that means.

> Sure. Give me the .o file that corresponds to your template. (And before 
> you explain that isn't how templates work, yes, I know. That's the point.)

  Uh, I was comparing Java interfaces with C++ classes with only pure
virtual functions and no member variables. That's exactly what I asked:
What is the difference between these two things? You responded with what
I quoted first above.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message