«

[GrimFang4]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Eagg @ Aug 19 2006, 08:46 AM) [snapback]249609[/snapback]</div>

I find it amusing that on some boards, this one included, people still argue about oop vs procedural programing.
[/b]

We're discussing, not arguing, I believe. OOP vs. procedural does have merit in a discussion since both have uses.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Eagg @ Aug 19 2006, 08:46 AM) [snapback]249609[/snapback]</div>

With todays' complexity of the applications and especially games there is simply no point to compare those both forms with each other, it's not about better or worse, it's about possible or impossible.

GrimFang4, on what facts do you base your opinion that oop will run slower than procedural.
The compiling/linking part might be slower, but then you have native code and the CPU doesn't care how it got created, imho.
[/b]

It's not just my opinion that OO programs run slower. Why are you just trying to refute my "opinion" with your "humble opinion" anyway? Defeats the purpose of labelling yourself humble. You can either look up the information yourself, test some code yourself, or sit back and listen (assuming you know what it's all about already). Object-oriented programming is deeply based on Pointers/References/Addresses. It can be seen logically that looking up a memory address and then checking a variable will take more time than just checking a variable. Then think about objects with object members. Following pointers to pointers to pointers, you'll be slowing your program down. It's not such a big deal as I mentioned before with our awesome computer capabilities, but it does make a difference. This is why linked lists are slower than arrays most of the time. Compilers do not make everything into some super great 'native code'. You'll notice that there are usually several ways to get an identical result when programming. When run, they probably won't take the same amount of time. Without optimizations, a compiler will take exactly what you give it and convert it to machine code.

When talking about "possible or impossible", it makes no difference. Every task procedural can do, OO can do and vice-versa. The problem indeed lies with complexity. Programs written procedurally can get out of hand way easier than those written in an OO style.

It almost seems like you already knew when you (puzzlingly) said this...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Eagg @ Aug 19 2006, 08:46 AM) [snapback]249609[/snapback]</div>

This is how all natural and non-natural things in our nice universe develop. They start out simple and efficient (better say become efficient over some time) and then the next things build on them and increase the complexity by abstraction. The higher the abstraction the lower the efficiency, but you couldn't care less since you have no choice.
[/b]