Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

C++ is better than C

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 20:11

And you know it.

Admit it.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 20:15

Sad, but true.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 20:26

``Programming languages should be designed not by piling feature on top of feature, but by removing the weaknesses and restrictions that make additional features appear necessary.''

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 20:42

>>1
Good C programmers write better C++ code than C++ programmers.
FACT.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 20:54

>>4
Let me elaborate.
C++ programmers do not understand when the tools their language offers are importand and shall be used and when not. They also can rarely combine them properly.
A C programmer, having written 10000 stacks, 432784723 linked lists, 3478124731284 queues, polymorphism, having spent 3248385932 hours on the design of the program, has more experience with using these tools (because he has to implement them, and has to implement them in a way that they will work together abstractly allowing scalability etc)

My suggestion: Start with C, code C for 4 years, in the meanwhile learn other stuff (haskell and lisp is a must), and then learn C++.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 21:31

>>5
you write everything twice?

Everything I design that I don't need to retune goes into a header file, which I then include and use at my discretion.

People forget that C++ is just C, with a fancy cpp. You can do everything you do in C++ in C.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 21:32

>>5
What makes you think C++ programmers aren't experienced with such data structures?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 21:33

>>6
You can do everything you do in C++ in C.
HIBT?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 22:14

>>5
Hey cuntbag, we had to code a stack, queue, list, tree, etc. in a C++ class. Don't assume people who learned C++ only/before C do not really know what data structures are. Hell, the class was called "data structures <something>"(in french, eh). It covered shit like pointers too, obviously. Our two C++ teachers even didn't want us to use the string class(char* 4tw).

Yeah, maybe that those who learned C++ by themselves program like morons, but that's doesn't apply to this language alone(but to every language).

I never learned C, I don't see the point. C++ does the job and I could probably code in C easily anyway.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 22:52

I learned C++ before C, but after Java. Consequently, I felt that the OO features of C++ were clumsy, the syntax was obscure and terrible, and the compiler did too much magic shit under the hood.

Now that I've started getting into C itself, I think it's pretty elegant and good at what it was designed for. And it's made me understand why Stroustrup chose to design C++ the way he did.

That said, I still think that C++ would've been a better language if backwards compatibility with C wasn't one of its design goals.

In before ENTERPRISE JAVAFAG, etc.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 23:03

I learned C++ before C, but after Java.
/facepalm

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 23:11

That said, I still think that C++ would've been a better language if backwards compatibility with C wasn't one of its design goals.
C++ is not backwards compatible with C.
ISO disagrees with you.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 23:24

>>12
Not entirely, but it retains a much greater degree of backwards compatibility than it would have, had that not been one of its goals. Read TDaEoC.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-20 23:41

>>11
Facepalm yourselves, [spoiler][b]COCKSHITTERS[/spoiler]. You know C++ sucks.

>>12
FFS. Exactly what are you referring to here? That you can't have a variable named class? Lol? The differences are pretty minor. And are you going to dispute that compatibility was one of C++'s design goals?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 0:13

>>6
You can do everything you do in C++ in C.

HOLY SHIT ! C++ IS TOURING-COMPLETE !

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 0:16

>>6
You can do everything you do in C++ in C.
C doesn't have the wonderfully terse Turing-complete template meta-programming language. While it may not necessarily be very useful to statically compute factorials (a purposefully shitty example), it's certainly something that cannot be done with vanilla C.

>>14
Exactly what are you referring to here?
Aside from the more obvious differences (namespace support, function naming conventions, other bullshit features, etc) --

o  C has an explicit, separate namespace for structs.
o  C++ lacks implicit conversion from void*, implicit function prototyping, implicit main signature, minor things etc.
o  ANSI C doesn't allow arrays with lengths specified by a const ``variable'' qualifier.
o  etc.

Please refer to http://david.tribble.com/text/cdiffs.htm for more differences.

Name: LavosPhoenix 2008-04-21 0:22

I actually prefer C++ to C anyway. Templates being the main reason.

Name: Leenous Tourvalds 2008-04-21 0:25

C++ is for incompetent programmers.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 1:54

>>16
YHBT

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 9:09

>>19
Is metatrolling.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 9:33

>>20
You are trolling yourself.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 9:53

Using C++ over C is worth just for the STL alone.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 16:02

int main(void) {
    int new, class = 0;
    new = class;
    return new;
}

WHERE IS YOUR SEPPLES NOW?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 16:05

>>15
Troll or just obtuse?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 18:19

troll my anus

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 20:03

ITT butthurt faggots.

The OP is right.

ADMIT IT

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 20:14

>>26
Hello OP:

Would you please go BACK TO /b/?

Thank you,
GJS J. Sussman

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 21:21

IMPOSTOR

The real SUSSMAN never signs his name like that!

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-21 23:48

>>27
Hello OP:

Would you please go BACK TO /B/?

Thank you,
GJS J. Sussman

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 0:03

you're all a bunch of whinny cocksuckers
harden the fuck up and use the instruction sets for the processor you're using

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 0:04

>>29
In before retarded “what is /B/?”.

Name: GJSussman !xpQSO2ECEY 2008-04-22 0:11

>>27,29
Please refrain from mimicking me in such a mocking manner. It is unscientific and ultimately destructive. Please note my unique tripcode1 when distinguishing authentic GJS posts from those of imitators.

               Gerald Jay Sussman
________________________________________________________________

1Tripcodes are a method of authentication that does not require registration most often used in 2channel-style message boards or Futaba Channel-style imageboards. A tripcode is the result of input to a cryptographic hash function on the message board server, usually entered in the same field as the name.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 0:12

>>30

>you're all a bunch of whinny cocksuckers

So now you've just accused us of being horses. Great argument, that.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 0:12

tripdick

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 0:14

I have sage autofilled for posts like these

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 0:19

>>33
yes,horses
choking down each others cocks (which are pretty huge lol) and shit in some grand horse orgy spectacle

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 0:29

>>36
Please stop trolling me.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 0:30

>>37
Hello I am here to collect the beet toll please use the bucket.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 1:04

>>38
/me shits in bucket and rapes you with horsecock

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-22 1:05

>>39
back to #sicp
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -