>>8
AHAHAHAHA!
Jesus fucking Christ, get off my /prog/.
C++ is a walk in the park, but Java is still easier. I would fucking hope that's what >>7 meant.
Retards and script kiddies, all.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-29 3:21
>>9
I find that Java's syntax has a lot more elements to remember. Additionally, Java is more powerful then C++ "out of the box," so Java programmers are actually more focussed on the programming aspects, rather then reinventing the wheel.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-29 3:22
Toy language fags think Java is hard. Also, functional programming is hard.
Is there anything these faggots can actually do besides calculating factorials?
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-29 3:33
>>10
Are you kidding?
In Java, everything has to be a class. All of the rest is equivalent to C++, except it has 90% of the language features removed.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-29 3:39
>>12
And except that Java has garbage collection, which isn't important at all, amirite?
>>13
C++0x moves boost.smart_ptr into the STL, which means you can wrap all your heap-allocated pointers in what will be a std::shared_ptr (reference-counted pointer). BUILT-IN.