Thread: Possible to create methods for data in structs?

Originally Posted by Dave_Sinkula

>
Or in C++ you could use what you had.

well that sounds rather appealing...

Originally Posted by Dave_Sinkula

>
[edit]By the way, this

Code:

   diffuser diff = {zeroEnergy};

zeroed out those variables.

then perhaps I should look into that way of doing it... or perhaps I am looking to hard to save myself 2 extra lines of code that overall probably keep things simpler.

is there any situation in which a C++ compiler would complain about anything that the C compiler didn't have a problem with?

ie should g++ -lm -lncurses -o dmc dmc.c ever complain if gcc -lm -lncurses -o dmc dmc.c doesn't?

<edit>
I wonder how hard it would be to write a textfield (like the one i am writing in) that is modal and supports some ViM commands... AND lets you use tab
</edit>

There are some things that are allowed in C that don't work in C++. Functions with an implicit return type, for example, or passing any amount of parameters to a function with an empty argument list. Old-style parameter lists are also disallowed in C++. (Not that you often see them - the only working piece of code I know that uses them is the zlib library.)

so do you have any thoughts then on the relative virtues of C/C++ in scientific computing applications?

Often, C will be a little faster. Not always. C++ usually allows better modeling of the problem, thus making implementation simpler. In general, C++ requires a little less code to do the same thing.