Really frustrated when moving from C# to C++
-
Mostly because of how pointers and references work, and also function definition seems very different. :((
.jpg wrote:
Mostly because of how pointers and references work
It's a one thing that distinguish boys and real men.
-
Mostly because of how pointers and references work, and also function definition seems very different. :((
On the other hand, you should find moving to VB refreshing... :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
.jpg wrote:
Mostly because of how pointers and references work
It's a one thing that distinguish boys and real men.
-
On the other hand, you should find moving to VB refreshing... :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles]Lol:) Yes.:thumbsup:
-
There are two ways to look at this, either: a) once you have figured out how pointers and referencing works (in which case you'll be a "man") --or-- b) you just give up as it is too complicated There is a very real difference between groups a & b. The people who write .net understand this stuff, they handle it for you (for the most part). If you have any interest in your craft, it will be good to get to grips with this stuff. When the penny dropped for me (back when I was at uni) it was like a moment of zen enlightenment, it tied together several parts of disparate courses: it bridged the gap between chip design & assembler and the higher level stuff we'd been doing elswhere. Although I found it interesting for its own sake, I still find this stuff useful ten years on. It makes learning new langauages easier for one thing.
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^] -
Mostly because of how pointers and references work, and also function definition seems very different. :((
You're really gonna miss the String class. :)
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on! Code, follow, or get out of the way.
-
Mostly because of how pointers and references work, and also function definition seems very different. :((
I feel the same way about C++ to C#. I've found you still need to check for null just as often and C#, without the .NET library (libraries are really a different topic...IMHO), is hardly the C++ 2.0 most C/C++ programmers had been longing for. I would like a reinvented C/C++ without all the historical baggage but I'd like to keep pointers and references the way they are. I had high hopes for C# but I think they missed a great opportunity to "fix" what was wrong with C/C++ and instead ended up trying to "fix" what was wrong with Java.
-
There are two ways to look at this, either: a) once you have figured out how pointers and referencing works (in which case you'll be a "man") --or-- b) you just give up as it is too complicated There is a very real difference between groups a & b. The people who write .net understand this stuff, they handle it for you (for the most part). If you have any interest in your craft, it will be good to get to grips with this stuff. When the penny dropped for me (back when I was at uni) it was like a moment of zen enlightenment, it tied together several parts of disparate courses: it bridged the gap between chip design & assembler and the higher level stuff we'd been doing elswhere. Although I found it interesting for its own sake, I still find this stuff useful ten years on. It makes learning new langauages easier for one thing.
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^]My observation is that people who discount the importance of knowing how things really work (i.e. how things work in the absence of an unseen, out-of-thread garbage collector) tend to be people who look at everything from a very PC-centered perspective. On a PC, or anything resembling a PC, it probably does not make sense for application code to need to do anything special just to effect proper garbage collection. But a real computer scientist, or even a reasonably good (i.e. versatile) programmer, should realize that not everything is a PC, and that there is value to being able to run things on devices that are not PCs (e.g. microcontrollers retailing for $2). This is just one of a whole family of spurious, PC-centric arguments I see on the Internet, which has, after all, become a network largely comprised of PCs. Statements like "every application should have logging" or "every application should be OO" fall into the same category. Such assertions really seem nonsensical if one considers the code that runs inside of digital wristwatches, DVD drive controllers, and such.
-
You're really gonna miss the String class. :)
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on! Code, follow, or get out of the way.
-
There are two ways to look at this, either: a) once you have figured out how pointers and referencing works (in which case you'll be a "man") --or-- b) you just give up as it is too complicated There is a very real difference between groups a & b. The people who write .net understand this stuff, they handle it for you (for the most part). If you have any interest in your craft, it will be good to get to grips with this stuff. When the penny dropped for me (back when I was at uni) it was like a moment of zen enlightenment, it tied together several parts of disparate courses: it bridged the gap between chip design & assembler and the higher level stuff we'd been doing elswhere. Although I found it interesting for its own sake, I still find this stuff useful ten years on. It makes learning new langauages easier for one thing.
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^]And even worse, pointers do exist in C# and work very much the same way.
"I just exchanged opinions with my boss. I went in with mine and came out with his." - me, 2011 ---
I am endeavoring, Madam, to construct a mnemonic memory circuit using stone knives and bearskins - Mr. Spock 1935 and me 2011 -
Mostly because of how pointers and references work, and also function definition seems very different. :((
I've just moved to Python - you can't even tell a thread to terminate or pass variables by reference!
Join the cool kids - Come fold with us[^] "Program as if the technical support department is full of serial killers and they know your home address" - Ray Cassick Jr., RIP
-
I think the ATL/MFC CString will prove to be adequate. I've found when comparing the pros and cons of each, they tend to balance out. That's one of the few areas I truly believe there is a tie.
Yeah, they should get the job done, especially if it's a self contained app. It's when you start getting into com and win api, is when it can get weird with all the variations and unicode, etc. Been awhile since I've done it, but remember all the conversions could get confusing.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on! Code, follow, or get out of the way.
-
On the other hand, you should find moving to VB refreshing... :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles]CPallini wrote:
you should find moving to VB refreshing...
...the parts other programming languages don't want to go anywhere near?
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
-
I think the ATL/MFC CString will prove to be adequate. I've found when comparing the pros and cons of each, they tend to balance out. That's one of the few areas I truly believe there is a tie.
Real programmers don't use
CStrings. In fact real programmers don't use strings at all. :-\If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
My observation is that people who discount the importance of knowing how things really work (i.e. how things work in the absence of an unseen, out-of-thread garbage collector) tend to be people who look at everything from a very PC-centered perspective. On a PC, or anything resembling a PC, it probably does not make sense for application code to need to do anything special just to effect proper garbage collection. But a real computer scientist, or even a reasonably good (i.e. versatile) programmer, should realize that not everything is a PC, and that there is value to being able to run things on devices that are not PCs (e.g. microcontrollers retailing for $2). This is just one of a whole family of spurious, PC-centric arguments I see on the Internet, which has, after all, become a network largely comprised of PCs. Statements like "every application should have logging" or "every application should be OO" fall into the same category. Such assertions really seem nonsensical if one considers the code that runs inside of digital wristwatches, DVD drive controllers, and such.
Interesting, I hadn't considered the problem it that way, and I think for your points are valid. That said, I've only really developed for PC and I've only really been a .net developer professionally, I enjoy tinkering with other languages and I miss c++, which I use to write my dissertation. I think the deepest separation is between those who like programming and computing for its own sake, and those who do it solely as their day job. I think a large proportion of the latter group fall into your PC-centric category as this is what pays and what is easiest to get work in. Got my 5 anyway!
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^] -
Mostly because of how pointers and references work, and also function definition seems very different. :((
C# to C++?! You shouldn't expect that move to be easy, and you should in fact be happy that you were not moving to C.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
-
I feel the same way about C++ to C#. I've found you still need to check for null just as often and C#, without the .NET library (libraries are really a different topic...IMHO), is hardly the C++ 2.0 most C/C++ programmers had been longing for. I would like a reinvented C/C++ without all the historical baggage but I'd like to keep pointers and references the way they are. I had high hopes for C# but I think they missed a great opportunity to "fix" what was wrong with C/C++ and instead ended up trying to "fix" what was wrong with Java.
bob16972 wrote:
and instead ended up trying to "fix" what was wrong with copy Java.
FFY.
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
C# to C++?! You shouldn't expect that move to be easy, and you should in fact be happy that you were not moving to C.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
You shouldn't reveal we C programmers are not friendly with intruders.
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
I've just moved to Python - you can't even tell a thread to terminate or pass variables by reference!
Join the cool kids - Come fold with us[^] "Program as if the technical support department is full of serial killers and they know your home address" - Ray Cassick Jr., RIP
Trollslayer wrote:
Python
we're talking about programming languages, aren't we? :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
