C++ is not inherently slower than C.

You technically do not ever need to use the STL. Perhaps you should use it anyway.

Ben for member of the Global Scripting Team.

I personally think C++ can do a bit more than C, although technically you could do anything with either. It's a matter of personal prefference. However, C++ is becoming the norm. ^^

who the hell started to talk about c <.<

>_< Quickly looked at your post didn't realize it was C# (not that i would have known anyway XD )

C++ as a language is way more powerful than C will ever be, this is not questioned at all.

I think I still have the tag or something.

This is mostly due to either people not writing standard C++ and relying on unportable details of their system (data type sizes, alignment, stuff that is not guaranteed to compile/run but is supported as an extension, ...), or using a compiler that does not compile C++ but only something that looks rather close to it (most compilers, actually, but notable older versions of MSVC++).

Both of these can be avoided with some effort. gcc is available on a lot of platforms, and g++ should work there too. I suppose the biggest problem is people relying on unportable libraries, avoiding which might require a lot more effort, especially if you try to port existing code which heavily relies on this library.

C++, as a language, is not less portable than C by anything that amateurs like us would notice.

If you don't need the STL then don't use it, theres no such thing as too bloated in programming...




Stefan: How exactly is your interface in Pascal/Delphi while your engine is in C++?