Another esbo thread hijack trying to start a flame war

[matsp]

You can design and write bad code in any language, I don't really see what makes C++ so special.

Yes, that is repeating, roughly what I started out with.

However, my point is that the purpose of object oriented programming is the form of encapsulation and extension that the class structure provides.

It is admittedly possible to do in C too, but it's much harder and the language doesn't "help" in this aspect. In more traditional (procedural/functional) programming, any encapsulation done has to be achieved by the programmers direct effort, there is no provision for the compiler to tell the programmer "Look, you are doing it wrong here, you should not use struct X's member variable Y" - C++ has "private" which means that a member variable is not accessible outside of the class - so you can't by mistake "forget to call the appropriate access function".

This only matters if you are writing code that is relatively large (more than a few hundred or thousand lines of code).

Reliability (such as keeping track of memory allocations and other resources) is made easier thanks to the form of constructor/destructor policy that classes provide. There is no need for the programmer [in general] to write a lot of code to handle this. C does not make life so easy here either.

And of course, if you have stupid people, you will end up with stupid code. I have seen a fair number of examples of that in both C and C++ - there is no silver bullet.

--
Mats

[whiteflags]

To be honest with you C++ comes across to me as a lot of mumbo jumbo and waffle that I don't need to write a program. There is nothing there I need nor want.

Even if it is "mumbo jumbo", C to C++ is not a 1:1 translation that a human should need to do.

[cpjust]

I'm with esbo. Who needs all this new stuff anyways. Why bother driving a fancy car with all those confusing knobs & buttons when you can just rid a horse instead. Why build houses out of bricks, wood & concrete when we can just find a nice cave to live in & rub sticks together to make fire...

[jEssYcAt]

Exactly! All teh sexy pplz live in caves NEway!

[Akkernight]

Does C have vector ?
And I've seen some C code, looks bad :P looks old xP But I don't know about any specifications and stuff

[esbo]

I'm with esbo. Who needs all this new stuff anyways. Why bother driving a fancy car with all those confusing knobs & buttons when you can just rid a horse instead. Why build houses out of bricks, wood & concrete when we can just find a nice cave to live in & rub sticks together to make fire...

The days when new meant better are long gone, but we have been conditioned over the
years into thinking new means better so people accept it blindly and trott out the namecalling caveman arguemet rather than have to justify the 'new'.

For example the new method of 'light touch' regulation for banks has not done us any favours and new anti biotics have left us with filthy hospitals full of superbugs.

There is plenty of appalling software written these says with 'new' C++.

[esbo]

Does C have vector ?
And I've seen some C code, looks bad :P looks old xP But I don't know about any specifications and stuff

Yes I believe vector is apelt a-r-r-a-y in C, one less letter, so it is more eficient
Also the term actually describes what it is rather than use a word which describes something totally different.
In the old days a fire was called a fire, now it's called a spoon, thats progress for you.
No problems with that part from a few burnt lips.

[tabstop]

Yes I believe vector is apelt a-r-r-a-y in C, one less letter, so it is more eficient
Also the term actually describes what it is rather than use a word which describes something totally different.
In the old days a fire was called a fire, now it's called a spoon, thats progress for you.
No problems with that part from a few burnt lips.

vectors can be implemented (in part) with arrays, in much the same way that a spaceship can be implemented (in part) with heat-absorbing tiles.

[King Mir]

O_o

This rules out recursive templates, mutually recursive templates, nested templates, and determinism through template expansion.

So... yea... saying that macros are capable of everything templates can do except what they can't do isn't particularly useful.

recursive templates, mutually recursive templates: Standard C++ only guarantees 7 levels of instanciation, so this isn't very useful anyway, without compiler extensions.

nested templates: You can nest macros; that would be passing the result of one macro as an argument to another.

determinism through template expansion: Can you give an example of what you mean by this?

[King Mir]

Yes I believe vector is apelt a-r-r-a-y in C, one less letter, so it is more eficient

Arrays don't resize for you when you need to add one more element to the end. Static arrays dont resize at all, and dynamic arrays require you to reinvent the wheel for every type stored in them.

Linked lists are even worse in C. In C++, you just use the std::list implementation.

[iMalc]

Are you really that clueless?

It would appear that he is!!!

[esbo]

Anyay this discussion arose when I gave an example in C but was informed C++ was required, however C is a part of C++ is it not??

[esbo]

And you are obviously not interested in writing large, maintainable and reliable software.

--
Mats

Nore are Microsoft apparently
As you and I have said before you can write large unmaintainable and unreliable software in any language. Such problems are generated by the programmers, not the language.
Further more if you also require the code to be highly efficient you are probably going to use C. You can also use assembler, but C is not that far off assember anyway.

[cpjust]

OK, if you want an example of how C++ can kick C's butt, here you go:
Which is faster, C's qsort() function or C++'s std::sort() function?
Since std::sort() is a template which can take advantage of inlining, the speed can be substantially faster than qsort().
http://www.tilander.org/aurora/2007/...and-qsort.html

[tabstop]

Anyay this discussion arose when I gave an example in C but was informed C++ was required, however C is a part of C++ is it not??

No..