Edwin Knoppert wrote:
I very much like the speed of Purebasic and small exe size. I realize that you lose some of this with OOP
That's not really true. If you organise your program correctly there's no reason why programming using an OOP method won't give you the same size exe and speed.
first.. i like oop 2nd, with oop all functions need to be present due the way the class needs to be exposed.
By using ordinary functions, they may not all been called, a good compiler only includes what get's called.
I am not sure about purebasic but for example the static libs icw the lcc compiler does this.
I assume in most languages using classes your are stuck with the full size of the compiled class.
Yes, it depends on the compiler. But OOP does not necessarily equal bloat and slow code. Also, even if a compiler did add a few kb to an exe due to some overhead while compiling using an OOP style, this is nothing compared to the time saving and better organisation of the program.
It's a misconception to think that using OOP in your programs has any bad side effects. It is only a different way of thinking and working. period!