• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Java & c++ : Home of confusion ?

 
Saurabh Agrawal
Ranch Hand
Posts: 244
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Why java is not 100% pure OOP but c++ ?
I f someone says since java allows primitives therefore its is not 100% pure oop then i should ask that c++ also supports primitives and yet it is considered as 100% pure OOP??
I hope i get the reply soon by my friends here !!
Saurabh
 
Pierre Henry
Ranch Hand
Posts: 31
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Neither Java nor C++ are 100% OO language, because the implementation
of the primitive types depends on the processor instruction set it's
being ported on.
Nevertheless, it's possible to create a Level instruction set on the
target processor that implements all the basic OO instructions like new so that primitive types should'nt be wrapped but would directly
represents processor register, wether in Java or in C++.
So does it mean Java and C++ are 100% OO ?
I don't think so.
I think a real 100% OO language is something like Smalltalk,
because even the block instruction are OO.
So even Java has a little work to do to gain OO heaven!
 
Jim Yingst
Wanderer
Sheriff
Posts: 18671
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I f someone says since java allows primitives therefore its is not 100% pure oop then i should ask that c++ also supports primitives and yet it is considered as 100% pure OOP??
I don't think I've ever heard someone suggest that C++ is more "pure" OO than Java is. I would think it's somewhat less OO than Java is, but for good reason - C++ needed to maintain backward compatibility with C. More than Java did anyway. What gives you the idea that C++ is considered more pure OO?
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic