[MPlayer-dev-eng] Re: [MPlayer-users] Re: lavc-Options for *BEST*

[Robert R. Wal]

On 03.02.09 Steve Lhomme pressed the following keys:

> [censored by reptile house]
> I've noticed during all the threads on your container that the first 
> critic about matroska is that the core library is coded in C++. While I 
> understand some people prefer their own languages for various reasons (C 
> and C++ are very compatible AFAIK), I don't think that's what should be 
> considered first about a container.

There is a theory and there is an implementation.

While theory behind OO programming is very sound, today's C++
implementations are crap and even the simplest code gets incredibly
bloated and suboptimal with regards to speed.

What's interesting, this isn't inherent to OO programming, there are OO
implementations decade old that handled machine resources better without
going outside the C framework (BOOPSI comes to mind immediatelly).

That's the reason why many reasource critical applications' authors
chose to use the lowest level language possible. It means C plus
occasional ASM. It would be all the way ASM if the portability wasn't
the issue.

Robert

-- 
Bastard Operator From 149.156.96.35