Are there reasons for beginner programmers to learn C ?
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
Not as a first language. Nor should an OOP-only language (VB, C#, etc.) be the first language. In my opinion BASIC and Pascal (and maybe Perl?) are still good first languages even though they won't apply very well to modern business. Professional developers still to be smacked with C.
-
Imagine a c++ programmer armed with a few smart pointer classes from boost and the stl and no understanding of the underlying issues each is designed to address.
-
Not as a first language. Nor should an OOP-only language (VB, C#, etc.) be the first language. In my opinion BASIC and Pascal (and maybe Perl?) are still good first languages even though they won't apply very well to modern business. Professional developers still to be smacked with C.
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
No! leave some jobs for us old-timers!
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
Maximilien wrote:
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++?
I would say not really however...
Maximilien wrote:
I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education.
Huh? I suspect there is quite a bit of new development in C. In the following it is the second highest language. http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html[^] In terms of "education" it might be relevant to at least introduce students to a variety of languages like assembly, lisp and C.
-
C is very important and a great way to learn exactly how a computer works, which is a double edged sword but if you push on through and gain a good understanding of C all other languages are a piece of cake.
Shouldn't code be as machine/hardware independent as possible ? If you really want to go down on your knees and look under the hood, it is still possible with C++ and C, but that is not a beginner topic.
Watched code never compiles.
-
Imagine a c++ programmer armed with a few smart pointer classes from boost and the stl and no understanding of the underlying issues each is designed to address.
Well, I don't care (one example of many) how std::string internally manages the string, I just want to do
std::string s("hello world");. it is safe, it is efficient.Watched code never compiles.
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
Yes, C is very good at teaching you HOW computers work. Think of C as super-assembly. (And if you learn assembly language first, C is a walk in the park.) I run across too much C++ code that would be much more stable if more C-type constructs were used. On the other hand, I've also dealt with too much C++ code that is nothing but C with classes and misses out on some truly great features of C++. I've also observed that C programmers who start thinking about encapsulation end up with many of the basics of C++. I remember when I very first learned C++ and realized that the this pointer is what I'd already been doing in a lot of my code, though having it built in was quite nice. Final point and a narrow observation; I've worked with several people whose first language was C#. Not one of them understood memory management. I've also found that they had a hard time moving "down" toward C or even C# code that had to be very hardware aware.
-
Well, I don't care (one example of many) how std::string internally manages the string, I just want to do
std::string s("hello world");. it is safe, it is efficient.Watched code never compiles.
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
Maximilien wrote:
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++?
No.
Maximilien wrote:
I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming.
It would be better to learn procedural C++ followed by C if the end is eventually to learn C. If the end is just to learn to program then there are easier choices.
Kevin
-
Are there reasons for beginner programmers to be taught C instead of C++? I'm not even thinking about Object Oriented programming, but simple declarative programming. I'm reading a lot of questions on CodeProject and on StackOverflow where people ask about issues with C language features that are so prone to errors and defect that it makes me cringe. A lot of those issues could be handled by simple C++ features (memory management (new/delete, smart pointers), strings, collections, references, ... ) I know there are lot of legacy code out there and it should still be maintained, but old code "ways" should not be the emphasis of the education. :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
-
Imagine a c++ programmer armed with a few smart pointer classes from boost and the stl and no understanding of the underlying issues each is designed to address.
_Josh_ wrote:
Imagine a c++ programmer armed with a few smart pointer classes from boost and the stl and no understanding of the underlying issues each is designed to address.
Nevertheless, Stroustrup recommends learning high-level procedural C++ and then learning the low-level stuff, i.e., the exact opposite of what you say.
Kevin
-
Shouldn't code be as machine/hardware independent as possible ? If you really want to go down on your knees and look under the hood, it is still possible with C++ and C, but that is not a beginner topic.
Watched code never compiles.
Absolutely not! Code should do the best it can to solve the problem (for your customer.) I'm having this very argument now over writing generic code that can be ported to Linux vs. sharing that code which you can, but tailoring the core to each platform. (The current version is more generic and simply doesn't scale well.) I'm also tired of using programs that suck on every platform, all in the name of being cross-platform.
-
Yes, C is very good at teaching you HOW computers work. Think of C as super-assembly. (And if you learn assembly language first, C is a walk in the park.) I run across too much C++ code that would be much more stable if more C-type constructs were used. On the other hand, I've also dealt with too much C++ code that is nothing but C with classes and misses out on some truly great features of C++. I've also observed that C programmers who start thinking about encapsulation end up with many of the basics of C++. I remember when I very first learned C++ and realized that the this pointer is what I'd already been doing in a lot of my code, though having it built in was quite nice. Final point and a narrow observation; I've worked with several people whose first language was C#. Not one of them understood memory management. I've also found that they had a hard time moving "down" toward C or even C# code that had to be very hardware aware.
I agree with most in your post, except this:
Joe Woodbury wrote:
Yes, C is very good at teaching you HOW computers work.
It reflects what's happening "underneath" only very slightly. It doesn't make it immediately clear that the computer just blindly does whatever you throw at it. It's "too typed" to make it obvious that types do not really exist.
-
I agree with most in your post, except this:
Joe Woodbury wrote:
Yes, C is very good at teaching you HOW computers work.
It reflects what's happening "underneath" only very slightly. It doesn't make it immediately clear that the computer just blindly does whatever you throw at it. It's "too typed" to make it obvious that types do not really exist.
Perhaps I should have written that C is better than most languages at teaching you how computers work, but agree that's true only if the person teaching stresses that point. I still like assembly as a must-language to learn.
