Elysia

Of course not, but I think it would prove that for such large scale performance projects, they chose C++ for a reason over C.
Because in some stuff C++ has an edge over C.

Let us summarize some key traits of C++ and C.
C++:
+ Much more functionality and flexibility than C.
+ High-level abstracts that makes it faster and easier to create certain type of code.
+ More beginner friendly than C.
- Not as portable as C.

C:
+ More portable than C++.
- Not as much functionality as C++.
- Less beginner friendly than C++.

Feel free to add or disagree with certain cons/pros.

__________________
Using: Microsoft Windows™ 7 Professional (x64), Microsoft Visual Studio™ 2008 Team System
I dedicated my life to helping others. This is only a small sample of what they said:
"Thanks Elysia. You're a programming master! How the hell do you know every thing?"
Quoted... at least once.

Kennedy

I believe (not being one myself) that many game companies have library packages that are written in C -- For the fast graphics libraries, is this not so? Are there not wrappers for these "low level" functions for C++? <<== Now, this is purely speculation as I am NOT a game programmer, but I believe that the majority of packages I have seen are based upon OpenGL and/or other such libraries. If I am misinformed on this matter, please correct me.

Prelude

>+ Much more functionality and flexibility than C.
Since it's really a perspective thing, I'll restrain myself from disagreeing with this.

>+ More beginner friendly than C.
I'm not sure I'd agree with this as a blanket statement. C++ has more "magic" going on which is distinctly not beginner friendly. In terms of being able to do more right out of the gate, C++ probably is more beginner friendly, but it also requires more faith. You might want to qualify this particular pro of C++.

__________________
My best code is written with the delete key.

Kennedy

My starter language was QBASIC (with the line numbers) -- then the "real" first language was Pascal. C was still fairly new and didn't have a widely published standard (late 80's). C++ wasn't around until much later for me. I tried it but could never get a "warm and fuzzy" about the way I/O was handled -- What the CRAP is this cout/cin thingy anyway. I found, however, that I could still use my good ole printf/scanf. Now, that I can use these in C++ is pretty cool, but, am I not still writing C code just with a .cpp extension?

For me, C was VERY beginner friendly since it was the 3rd language I learned (the second was i386 assembly). C++ was a major jump for my thought processes and completely was against the way I know to do things.

Also, both C and C++ are extremely portable -- I don't get why you think it isn't?

> + High-level abstracts

CONFUSE THE SNOT out of me. I cannot stand it. Let me deal with the trees, then I can take care of the whole forest. Don't make me just look at the forest not the trees.

> + Much more functionality and flexibility than C.

Pass me that crack pipe when you are done.

You cannot truly believe this? Neither is more or less functional than the other. Whereas you may not be able to make C do things you want it to do, I can. On the other hand, I don't know that I could successfully write a "hello World" in C++ .

It is completely a matter of choice -- this goes back to that thing of you cannot compare these two like that, nor any other language. It is purely a matter of preference.

Elysia

People, people, people. This is truth. It has more functionality and flexibility than C.
Now, whether you want or need it is another thing entirely.
Saying that c++ does not have more flexibility and functionality than C is like saying that assembly has more functionality and flexibility than C.

Right out of the box, for a newbie for programming, I would definitely call C++ easier since they do not have to worry about the low-level stuff right off the bat.

Yes, they are, of course. But C is more so than C, since there are some platforms where a C++ compiler does not exist.

You are not required to use them, but the functionality being there is a not bad thing. It is a good thing in case you need it.

Neither is more functional than the other, but C++ has more functionality built into the language. Classes, for example, are supported natively, while they must be emulated in C. Hence C++ has more functionality. This does not mean it could not be done in C with some more work, however. But some things, like templates, are difficult, if not impossible to do in C.

Do not get me wrong. They are a matter of choice. Neither are better than each other in that sense. But language-wise, functionality-wise, would you not say something is better than the other?
Like an electric screwdriver is probably better functionality-wise than a normal screw-driver, but it does not mean it is the best tool there is. That is subjective.

__________________
Using: Microsoft Windows™ 7 Professional (x64), Microsoft Visual Studio™ 2008 Team System
I dedicated my life to helping others. This is only a small sample of what they said:
"Thanks Elysia. You're a programming master! How the hell do you know every thing?"
Quoted... at least once.

Kennedy

So, is the word contradiction in your lexicon?

Prelude

>People, people, people. This is truth. It has more functionality and flexibility than C.
Then define what you mean by "functionality", what you mean by "flexibility", and prove it. Stomping around waving your opinion and calling it truth without any substantiation isn't productive, especially when you use ambiguous terms.

>Saying that c++ does not have more flexibility and functionality than C is
>like saying that assembly has more functionality and flexibility than C.
Actually, that makes perfect sense to me. C has the same depth and breadth as C++. Thus, they are equally functional and equally flexible. Assembly has slightly more depth than both C and C++, so it is slightly more functional but equally flexible. Next!

__________________
My best code is written with the delete key.

Elysia

*shrug* Then what is the point in expanding what I mean? I will just leave it be.

__________________
Using: Microsoft Windows™ 7 Professional (x64), Microsoft Visual Studio™ 2008 Team System
I dedicated my life to helping others. This is only a small sample of what they said:
"Thanks Elysia. You're a programming master! How the hell do you know every thing?"
Quoted... at least once.

anon

Use C I/O functions all you want, but remember that there are some cases where they leave you helpless (in templated code because of the type safety thing).

I see C sometimes favoured by beginners, and the reason is that higher levels of abstractions are harder to get, so because of the understanding issues they'll find it easier to do things the hard way. Similarly, beginners tend to find it easier to use goto and all globals instead of structured control statements and argument passing / return values.

__________________
I might be wrong.

Quoted more than 1000 times (I hope).

sean

Assembly DOES have more functionality and flexibility than C. You can't write a boot loader in C. You can't specify the arrangement of data within a struct in C.

Elysia

Then you are misinterpreting my words.

__________________
Using: Microsoft Windows™ 7 Professional (x64), Microsoft Visual Studio™ 2008 Team System
I dedicated my life to helping others. This is only a small sample of what they said:
"Thanks Elysia. You're a programming master! How the hell do you know every thing?"
Quoted... at least once.

sean

Fair enough. What is your definition of the word flexible and functional, then? I get that C++ generally deals with a higher-level of abstraction, but that really has nothing to do with flexibility and functionality. You can implement closures in C, you can have an OOP style in C, it all depends on the programmer.

Bubba

...and the single biggest excuse for slipping deadlines.

__________________
If you aim at everything you will hit something but you won't know what it is.

Yarin

Perhaps you really have misspoken, as most were interpreting your words according to standard English definitions?

__________________
GCC 4.4.0, Code::Blocks 8.02, Fedora 11, x64

Elysia

Perhaps I was.

What I meant is that C++ have things such as templates, OOP, classes, etc, etc.
Yes, you can emulate these in C, but it is not as easy as if they were natively supported. So if you do not have to invent a solution to get it working right, it might be safe to say that it is faster, usually easier and less error-prone to use them than to emulate them.
Assembly supports even less of such things than C. It does not even feature high-level syntax and statements such as ifs.
This is what I meant with C++ having more "features".
I think of it as having more tools available at the tips of the programmer, allowing us to get things done faster. The later part is subjective, of course.

__________________
Using: Microsoft Windows™ 7 Professional (x64), Microsoft Visual Studio™ 2008 Team System
I dedicated my life to helping others. This is only a small sample of what they said:
"Thanks Elysia. You're a programming master! How the hell do you know every thing?"
Quoted... at least once.