4 ms·

Seems to me that classes generally replace structs in such languages. I know they're not the same thing, but classes have the features of structs (and much more

• smitherfield 9y ago
  > classes have the features of structs (and much more) at the cost of performance. Not true; C++ classes have zero performance overhead over C/C++ structs (because they're just another word for the same thing). Of course Python classes have a lot of costly features that C++ classes don't have, but the notion of a "class" (with methods, constructors etc) is not one of them.
  • kronos29296 9y ago
    And also makes them look more complicated with more syntax. C++ has all those features that I will never know without adding performance. But people don't use Python for performance but ease of use. In C++ ease of use is given up for the sake of performance. In python it is the other way.
  • hasenj 9y ago
    Don't C++ classes (and therefore structs) have a hidden vtable?
    • taejo 9y ago
      Only if they have virtual members.
    • plq 9y ago
      vtable is always "hidden". It's only there when there is at least one virtual member defined. Sole difference between class and struct in C++ is default visibility. class A { int a; // private } struct A { int a; // public }
• bpicolo 9y ago
  A lot of people (my whole company, for sure) are using namedtuples essentially just as immutable structs. This is a case where classes aren't sufficing. To be fair, it's at least a little bit the functional-programming, immutability bandwagon, but either way it's helping maintain large python apps with many devs. Python36 gradual typing also helps here though, and am definitely interested to see if that changes the game a bit