C is better !!!!
-
It's been my sig for a few weeks now... :laugh:
You should never use standby on an elephant. It always crashes when you lift the ears. - Mark Wallace C/C++ (I dont see a huge difference between them, and the 'benefits' of C++ are questionable, who needs inheritance when you have copy and paste) - fat_boy
I stand corrected! I didn't realize fat_boy had a sense of humor!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Personal 3D projects Just Say No to Web 2 Point Blow
-
no, not really. Sometimes when you need the functionality of existing classes but with slight tweaks, but that code isn't polymorphic, then you have no choice but to copy/paste.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
i see from someone else's post that you were "quoting" fat_boy. understood. LOL...
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
I have written applications in C/C++ for embedded and C#/VB for enterprises.When it comes to choosing between C and C++ for an application i always go to C, no matter how much much much features C++ has
Behzad
None of the abovementioned languages (C, C++, C#, VB) are very good, IMHO, but C++ is among other things a better C. Not much better C, granted, but still better.
-
Well he mentions embedded systems, and I've heard horror stories about how bad some of the compilers are in terms of supporting C++, so it might just be less hassle dealing with C. Occasionally I do some OpenVMS development and it's always in C. I'd rather do C++, but the compiler is so slow that it's not worth the hassle.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Personal 3D projects Just Say No to Web 2 Point Blow
I've never done C++ on OpenVMS; only C -- Whitesmith's C, VAX C, DEC C, Compaq C (?), HP C. The hobbyist license and media seem to include it, but I haven't installed it.
-
I have written applications in C/C++ for embedded and C#/VB for enterprises.When it comes to choosing between C and C++ for an application i always go to C, no matter how much much much features C++ has
Behzad
I've only dabbled in C++; I've had no need for its "features". In my opinion, object-oriented languages are like big trucks, boats, and planes -- when you need them, you need them. But you don't need them if you're just going to the local pub. I don't like having to use objects and namespaces just to write "Hello world!" in C#. X| "Use the right tool for the right job." -- Scotty, et al
-
I have written applications in C/C++ for embedded and C#/VB for enterprises.When it comes to choosing between C and C++ for an application i always go to C, no matter how much much much features C++ has
Behzad
-
Well, you could use the C++ compiler as a better "C" (i.e. only use the "C" features). That fixes many of the holes of "C". I'm interested to understand your reasons for excluding "C++" from consideration though.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/Can you please tell me some of holes? I have done embedded coding in C and C++. In C you can use files in which source codes can act as classes and you can write application and do not use OOP features. Once upon a time, i heard from a guy " C++ is C with another syntax!".At the time,for the desktop i was using C# and for a embedded application C++. Now Iam using C in linux and altough IDEs are not as good as VS, i think that guy's opnoin was correct.I love coding in C which i think simplifies thinking; All in all There are some rules you must obey, no matter you use OOP or structured programming, etc.
Behzad
-
I have written applications in C/C++ for embedded and C#/VB for enterprises.When it comes to choosing between C and C++ for an application i always go to C, no matter how much much much features C++ has
Behzad
B will fight you. He thinks he's better because he's one letter higher up in the alphabet.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
B will fight you. He thinks he's better because he's one letter higher up in the alphabet.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
Speaking of alphabetic superiority. :rolleyes:
-
I have written applications in C/C++ for embedded and C#/VB for enterprises.When it comes to choosing between C and C++ for an application i always go to C, no matter how much much much features C++ has
Behzad
C is my favorite programming language in existence - bar none. However, there are plenty of times I'd choose C++ over C. I wouldn't want to write a n-tier business app in C for instance.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Can you please tell me some of holes? I have done embedded coding in C and C++. In C you can use files in which source codes can act as classes and you can write application and do not use OOP features. Once upon a time, i heard from a guy " C++ is C with another syntax!".At the time,for the desktop i was using C# and for a embedded application C++. Now Iam using C in linux and altough IDEs are not as good as VS, i think that guy's opnoin was correct.I love coding in C which i think simplifies thinking; All in all There are some rules you must obey, no matter you use OOP or structured programming, etc.
Behzad
Behzad Sedighzadeh wrote:
some of holes?
well, some of this was fixed by the C99 spec. 0. default function return value of "int" if not specified. Is "void" in C++/C99 1. better type safty.
for instance: formal function declaration needs type spec
int myfunc(a, b, c) is disallowed
must be:
int myfunc(int a, int b, int c);2. use of "const" instead of MACROs 3. standardized handling of arrays .vs. pointers 4. standardized pointer arithmetic. 5. more/better standard libraries. things like that.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
Can you please tell me some of holes? I have done embedded coding in C and C++. In C you can use files in which source codes can act as classes and you can write application and do not use OOP features. Once upon a time, i heard from a guy " C++ is C with another syntax!".At the time,for the desktop i was using C# and for a embedded application C++. Now Iam using C in linux and altough IDEs are not as good as VS, i think that guy's opnoin was correct.I love coding in C which i think simplifies thinking; All in all There are some rules you must obey, no matter you use OOP or structured programming, etc.
Behzad
Behzad Sedighzadeh wrote:
you can write application and do not use OOP features
C++ is technically a multi-paradigm language, you're not obliged to use OO. There are advantages to using procedural C++ - better abstraction and type safety and also STL.
Behzad Sedighzadeh wrote:
I love coding in C which i think simplifies thinking
I don't do either C or C++ these days but I much prefer C++.
Kevin
-
harold aptroot wrote:
copy and paste
LOL. Yeah sometimes that is the correct answer, but sometimes you're using a third-party library so you don't have possibility to copy and paste. Or were you being facetious and ironic?
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ahmed zahmed wrote:
Yeah sometimes that is the correct answer
Well, when you first learn programming don't you effectively start off with copying and pasting, :) e.g., copy an example from a book or other source and then play with it to see what's going on.
Kevin
-
None of the abovementioned languages (C, C++, C#, VB) are very good, IMHO, but C++ is among other things a better C. Not much better C, granted, but still better.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
None of the abovementioned languages (C, C++, C#, VB) are very good
So what's your definition of a very good language then? I thought you were a C++ worshipper?
Kevin
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
None of the abovementioned languages (C, C++, C#, VB) are very good
So what's your definition of a very good language then? I thought you were a C++ worshipper?
Kevin
Probably he is an F# lover now.
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
None of the abovementioned languages (C, C++, C#, VB) are very good
So what's your definition of a very good language then? I thought you were a C++ worshipper?
Kevin
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
I thought you were a C++ worshipper?
Wow! I don't worship programming languages. C++ lets me do my job, but I wouldn't call it a good language: first of all it is build on foundation of a really bad language (C) and it really can't go too far in fixing its flaws without breaking the compatibility. It is hard to learn, full of surprises, and the syntax is so complex that it is very hard to make good tools.
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
So what's your definition of a very good language then?
Don't know the definition, but some of the languages I like (low-level to high-level) are: Ada, Modula-2, OCaml/F#, Haskell, Dylan, Scheme. Mind you, I've never done anything serious with any of them, and I wouldn't pick any of them for any serious project. If a job needs to be done I always end up with ugly languages: C++, Perl, JavaScript, C#, VBA.
-
Probably he is an F# lover now.
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
he is an F# lover now
:) I like F#, but wouldn't really bet any money on it's success.
-
Can you please tell me some of holes? I have done embedded coding in C and C++. In C you can use files in which source codes can act as classes and you can write application and do not use OOP features. Once upon a time, i heard from a guy " C++ is C with another syntax!".At the time,for the desktop i was using C# and for a embedded application C++. Now Iam using C in linux and altough IDEs are not as good as VS, i think that guy's opnoin was correct.I love coding in C which i think simplifies thinking; All in all There are some rules you must obey, no matter you use OOP or structured programming, etc.
Behzad
Behzad Sedighzadeh wrote:
Can you please tell me some of holes?
One that really bothers me is implicit casting of pointers to void*
-
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
I thought you were a C++ worshipper?
Wow! I don't worship programming languages. C++ lets me do my job, but I wouldn't call it a good language: first of all it is build on foundation of a really bad language (C) and it really can't go too far in fixing its flaws without breaking the compatibility. It is hard to learn, full of surprises, and the syntax is so complex that it is very hard to make good tools.
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
So what's your definition of a very good language then?
Don't know the definition, but some of the languages I like (low-level to high-level) are: Ada, Modula-2, OCaml/F#, Haskell, Dylan, Scheme. Mind you, I've never done anything serious with any of them, and I wouldn't pick any of them for any serious project. If a job needs to be done I always end up with ugly languages: C++, Perl, JavaScript, C#, VBA.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
first of all it is build on foundation of a really bad language (C) and it really can't go too far in fixing its flaws without breaking the compatibility. It is hard to learn, full of surprises, and the syntax is so complex that it is very hard to make good tools.
Have you read Ian Joyner's C++ Critique 3rd Edition[^]? It's rather old now (1996) but worth a skim.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
If a job needs to be done I always end up with ugly languages: C++, Perl, JavaScript, C#, VBA
The only one I really hate in that list is Perl. My first experience of it was having to maintain the code of a developer who had left. I would always leave for home at the end of the day in a foul mood. It was quite common to identify a bug, know algorithmically how to fix it but then struggle with the actual Perl implementation! :mad: I'm not especially fond of JavaScript. I like C#. Of the languages I've actually used to at least "Hello World" level the one I've liked most is Eiffel (for which Ada is one influence). I've played with F# a little but find it quite tough. It's not as accessible as Scala. It might just be a superficial syntax thing, and I've not tried either seriously, so maybe Scala becomes equally scary once you get into realistic usages.
Kevin
