3 ms·

You could argue <language X> IS NOT (high-level) does not necessarily imply <language X> IS (low-level), in which case no-one classified C++ as low-level. I gu

You could argue <language X> IS NOT (high-level) does not necessarily imply <language X> IS (low-level), in which case no-one classified C++ as low-level. I guess for the large part the inter-op here is from (mostly) interpreted languages, which are certainly higher level than C++. Maybe instead of it being a binary choice between high-level and low-level languages, there is a middle ground. Fairly easy to argue that as the case.

deadbeeves 3y ago
The way the title is written does imply C and C++ are not high-level languages. "Connect C/C++ programs with high-level programming languages", not "connect C/C++ programs with other high-level programming languages". After reading the first sentence on the site, though, I think this was just a somewhat clumsy rephrasing. "SWIG is a software development tool that connects programs written in C and C++ with a variety of high-level programming languages." "A variety of high-level programming languages" implies there are some high-level languages that SWIG cannot connect C/++ with, and it's open to interpretation whether C/++ are among the high-level languages that SWIG doesn't connect C/++ with.
JohnFen 3y ago
> instead of it being a binary choice between high-level and low-level languages, there is a middle ground. There is: mid-level languages. I was taught (and still think of) C as a mid-level language; things like assembly are low-level languages; C++, Python, Java, etc., are all high-level languages. But I'm a graybeard, and these are the meanings that I've learned. It's possible that the definitions have shifted and nobody told me.