Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Wed 27 Aug 2014, 11:09
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Off-Topic Area » Programming
A skeptic's history of C++
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 1 [7 Posts]  
Author Message
Flash
Official Dog Handler


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 11024
Location: Arizona USA

PostPosted: Tue 23 Nov 2010, 10:12    Post subject:  A skeptic's history of C++  

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/programming-and-development/?p=3379&tag=nl.e055

Quote:
... What are probably the best criticisms of C++ have both been attributed to Stroustrup himself. The first is his statement that C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot, and C++ makes it harder — but when you shoot yourself in the foot with C++, you typically blow off your whole leg. The second is an interview for IEEE Computer Magazine that was supposedly shelved because it was decided it could not be published, in which he “admits” that C++ was all a joke from the very beginning, and he goes on to humorously extoll its vices. Stroustrup has disclaimed the article, saying it was a hoax, and said that he thinks it would have been funnier if he had written it himself. ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
jyore


Joined: 06 Nov 2010
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Tue 23 Nov 2010, 14:42    Post subject:  

lolz...that is good

c++ really is a joke Razz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Sit Heel Speak


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 2595
Location: downwind

PostPosted: Tue 23 Nov 2010, 15:20    Post subject:  

Laughing *whew* good thing Mr. Stroustrup has spared us the even funnier version...

Much the same goes for the evolution of xBase, using which all U.S. Federal income tax returns have been processed ever since the Clipper era of the mid-'80's. No doubt, somewhere in Ogden, Utah, or perhaps Philadelphia, there is a contract-programmer who could write much the same interview and then Jesse Ventura, if he is really fearless, would have grist....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
droope


Joined: 31 Jul 2008
Posts: 814
Location: Uruguay, Mercedes

PostPosted: Wed 24 Nov 2010, 22:12    Post subject:  

Wha? Sad

*ignorant mode on*

and what should we code our crazily complex low level stuff in? I thought c++ was the real deal

_________________
What seems hard is actually easy, while what looks like impossible is in fact hard.

“Hard things take time to do. Impossible things take a little longer.” –Percy Cerutty

Mi blog (Spanish)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Pizzasgood


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 6270
Location: Knoxville, TN, USA

PostPosted: Tue 30 Nov 2010, 02:26    Post subject:  

Nah, C is the "real deal". C++ is sort of a higher-level (that is, more abstract) version of C, arguably on crack. In many ways it is a nicer language, but it can potentially get very ugly if you don't know what you're doing, and even if you do. There are a lot of "weird" things you can do with it and a lot of ways to make things more complex than you ever wanted them to be.

C on the other hand is a very simple and predictable, if sometimes cumbersome, language. Not only is it easier to learn and write, but it's also easier to implement. So it's a pretty omnipresent language.

My own preference is for C++, at least for writing my own code. When it comes to working with other people's code I prefer C, because I know C much better than I know C++, so it's easier to figure out what they were trying to do. Though, a lot depends on the program and the programming style that was used. It's certainly possible for C++ to be a lot clearer than C if used right. But it can be harder to track down odd little bugs and nuances since it leaves more possibilities open than C does.


If you want to get very low-level though, you'd use an assembly language. Those are as low-level as it gets, short of writing things out as pure numbers. But different architectures (e.g PowerPC vs. x86 vs. ARM) have slightly different assembly languages, and assembly is usually even more cumbersome to work with than C, so it tends not to be used much in the PC world anymore. It's still pretty important in the embedded world, though they're making more and more use of C and even Java nowadays.

_________________
Between depriving a man of one hour from his life and depriving him of his life there exists only a difference of degree. --Muad'Dib

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
droope


Joined: 31 Jul 2008
Posts: 814
Location: Uruguay, Mercedes

PostPosted: Tue 30 Nov 2010, 07:25    Post subject:  

Hi Pizzas!

Thank you for your answer, I think I understand much more now.

Pizzasgood wrote:
Nah, C is the "real deal". C++ is sort of a higher-level (that is, more abstract) version of C, arguably on crack. In many ways it is a nicer language, but it can potentially get very ugly if you don't know what you're doing, and even if you do. There are a lot of "weird" things you can do with it and a lot of ways to make things more complex than you ever wanted them to be.

Aah, I get it. Kinda like PHP?
Quote:

C on the other hand is a very simple and predictable, if sometimes cumbersome, language. Not only is it easier to learn and write, but it's also easier to implement. So it's a pretty omnipresent language.

My own preference is for C++, at least for writing my own code. When it comes to working with other people's code I prefer C, because I know C much better than I know C++, so it's easier to figure out what they were trying to do. Though, a lot depends on the program and the programming style that was used. It's certainly possible for C++ to be a lot clearer than C if used right. But it can be harder to track down odd little bugs and nuances since it leaves more possibilities open than C does.

Hmm, so despite everything, you'd stay with C++?
Quote:

If you want to get very low-level though, you'd use an assembly language. Those are as low-level as it gets, short of writing things out as pure numbers. But different architectures (e.g PowerPC vs. x86 vs. ARM) have slightly different assembly languages, and assembly is usually even more cumbersome to work with than C, so it tends not to be used much in the PC world anymore. It's still pretty important in the embedded world, though they're making more and more use of C and even Java nowadays.


Look, i've found a hello world tutorial for assembly. What do you mean with embedded world?

Thanks!

_________________
What seems hard is actually easy, while what looks like impossible is in fact hard.

“Hard things take time to do. Impossible things take a little longer.” –Percy Cerutty

Mi blog (Spanish)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Pizzasgood


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 6270
Location: Knoxville, TN, USA

PostPosted: Tue 30 Nov 2010, 19:03    Post subject:  

Embedded refers to the chips in things like microwaves, cars, portable electronics, etc. Which have a very wide range of capabilities nowadays. For example, a cell phone vs. a cheap digital thermostat.
_________________
Between depriving a man of one hour from his life and depriving him of his life there exists only a difference of degree. --Muad'Dib

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [7 Posts]  
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Off-Topic Area » Programming
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0671s ][ Queries: 11 (0.0085s) ][ GZIP on ]