what's so bad about c++? maybe i'm missing something, but after two years of c, c++ looks very nice.
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-16 14:36 ID:rReltTgc
Everything.
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-16 14:37 ID:v6ueloxt
Lack of optional automatic memory management. Failed overcomplicated set of features of which everybody uses his own practical subset, which differs from everybody else's. Templates (the failure of the language to provide dynamic typing).
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-16 15:04 ID:e3TW3ohJ
it has some good stuff. if you are into super efficient stuff but want a bit more power than C, it's good.
But still, it's a fucking mess. what do you think about D?
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-16 15:09 ID:v6ueloxt
If you are into super efficient stuff go for C.
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-16 15:21 ID:e3TW3ohJ
but c++ is more powerful, even if you use a subset of it
Use only a subset of C++ for maximum clarity. This means no multiple inheritance, use templates sparingly and try to minimize the number of classes your program uses.
You're pulling those numbers out of your ass.
You know that most C++ constructs don't come with any extra runtime cost, right? And that those that does are clearly documented, and usually you need to do something that cost as much to do the same in C (like using function pointers to emulate virtual methods)
>>20
Alternative: learn to code
Every feature of every language can be put to bad use. A programmer that sucks will manage to write shitty code no matter how many language features you forbid him to use.
Most, if not all the shitty C++ code I've seen seldom used any C++ feature that doesn't exist in java.
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-18 21:16 ID:1+70Jidh
C++ is shit
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-18 22:21 ID:Q+EfxAzp
>>24
the truth is that if you don't want to cope with incomprehensible compilation errors, you better stay away from some c++ features.
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-18 23:18 ID:kwoyrx6F
A programmer that sucks will manage to write shitty code no matter how many language features you forbid him to use.
Perl loves you too.
C++ seduces you into writing methods and other useless crap that you'll never use, but "could see how someone could". Only you're the only person who ever sees that code, so.
Also, template AIDS.
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-19 5:49 ID:/kumtvn2
>>24
(Note: I'm not >>10.) Even though C++ should come at little extra cost, the object paradigm tends to produce less efficient code, and encourages overengineering and bloat.
As for the features, sure, all can be put to good or bad use, but some are almost always bad, while some are almost always good. And out of these features, few pose a significant advantage over plain C. I suggest to disallow the ones that are almost always bad from the general public, allowing them for EXPERT PROGRAMMERS only.
What I really mean is that everyone, >>24, should stick with today's special: C++--.
>>31
Templates bite. They are somewhere between a feature and a misfeature, a fart coming from a language which doesn't support dynamic typing.
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-19 9:35 ID:4nJc4rRF
>>24
If you need to know, those numbers are from Stroustrup's The C++ Programming Language, and I'm inclined to believe the man knows what he's talking about.
I'm also aware that using only C features in C++ will not make the code any slower than equivalent C code, but why you would program in C++ if you do not use its defining features is beyond me.