>>9
Can I just write mostly in C and use C++ object oriented shit only when it suits the application I'm using?
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-26 14:11
Well it's generally considered a bad practice to have C with classes, even though that's all what we want. You can mimic the constructor and destructor idea in C with free functions. See http//en.wikiboo/... for an example.
>>9
For low level stuff, I fully agree with you. C++ sucks. For high level stuff, I fully agree with >>8, Java sucks (nor it's a true high level language with all that OO anal stuff).
>>11
Bad practices my ass, the world is full of best practice scalable solutions and look at what they are. Multiparadigm programming FTW.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-27 6:52
>>15
Yeah, I like that C++ supports structured, OO and functional programming, hm, generic programming too, if that's considered a paradigm. Go C++!
>>11,18 same person
I see your point #15, but maybe I should have just wrote that it's better to not mix C & C++ together if you can help it. For instance one of the reasons to prefer streams over printf is that you replace a runtime error with one at compile-time. That seems to be the biggest reason why people want to mix C & C++ anyway, which is just stupid and lazy most of the time. I have no issues with anything else.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-23 17:48 ID:iBvaURBu
>>2-8
i lol'd so hard
went from alright to shit fast
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-23 17:50 ID:0CKBwAEu
Haskell motherfuckers.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-23 23:45 ID:tC2R0H5t
>>15
C++ is a genetically deformed offspring of its not so proud parent C.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-24 0:01 ID:7VhLENTx
Objective C is a pretty neat combination of C and Smalltalk. You get all the useful things C brings, with some of the awesome of Smalltalk.
By comparison, C++ the Terrible hangs out with its queen, Java, making newcomers miserable and giving a reason to pay high wages to one-trick ponies.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-24 0:09 ID:KtQtC8SP
>>22
yes, toy scripting languages can be quite fun
Bringing /prog/ back to its people
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy