Thread: Learning C or C++ ?

Originally posted by Yawgmoth
C++ is not designed for OOP?!?

Not like Java, no.

Originally posted by Yawgmoth
And has it ever occurred to you that maybe he DOES know about Java, and chose to do C/C++ anyway? Maybe oh maybe...

But how do we know either way? Should I not mention other alternatives and just assume he knows everything out there? No.

Just because I don't agree with your opinions, I'm a troll?

No, it's because the topic was about C/C++ and you joined with Java, the guy didn't say he want to learn Java. This that you think java is better then C/C++ it's your problem, well, the world in general thinks else...

it depends on what you are doing on whether you should use Java or C++. Or so they say. I believe there is NO use for Java. Not that I don't like the language, just that C++ is usually a lot faster, and is as easy-to-use as Java, IMHO.

And making the statement that Java is more suited for OOP is foolish. I believe Java can use OOP just as well as C++. And exists mainly because people wanted OOP.

Originally posted by Govtcheez
Chris, I know you love acting the part of "righteous Java defender", but do it somewhere else.

Maybe a year ago, yeah. But not now. Actually, I don't even like Sun anymore. I wish IBM was the owner of Java. Secondly, I use whichever tool is right for the job. I love C myself, its speed rules me. But many of my everyday tasks wouldn't be suited for C, rather Java/J2EE. If I can use C#, I'm on it. It just depends on what I'm doing.

Originally posted by Govtcheez
The guy didn't ask a damn thing about Java, or even OOP.

I would think someone would want to learn a language that does something best. Against what you guys say, Java is more suited for OOP. Even in the design of the language, it's all OOP. How can you expect to learn a language like C++ and not get into OOP? Why would someone limit themselves like that? So, since I know Java is better for OOP, I suggested it. Jeebus people, get a grip.

Shiro, you're correct man, of course they're differents, I'm just trying to show that some people think that learning C is wasting time, and goe's learning C++ without knowing what's programming, maybe I'm not someone with a little bit experience to talk, but, for me at least, learning C isn't waste of time, I really like it.

I didn't say learning C is a waste of time, in fact, learning whatever language is not a waste of time. What I meant was that learning C is not necessary before learning C++. And one can learn C++ without knowing what is programming. Learning a language and learning programming is something which is done at same time. But which way of programming one learns depends on which language one is learning.

If one starts learning C, one learns programming procedural. And when one learns C++, one can learn both, but most courses only teach object oriented programming when it comes to C++.

I would think someone would want to learn a language that does something best.

I think that is not the case in this thread, the case here is that the original poster needs or wants to learn C++ and wonders if he/she should learn C before.

Why would someone limit themselves like that?

The original poster did not say that he/she doesn't want to learn Java. Sure, it is a nice language. But not applicable in this thread.

I don't think there is a "better" language. For certain applications, certain languages are more suitable. That is why applications are in a lot of cases written in several languages. I'm working in the field of embedded systems where sometimes systems are build using assembler, C, and Java together, or other configurations of languages. You don't write an OS in Java and most manufacturers of consumer electronics today prefer building the applications of the system onto a Java virtual machine so that they can reuse the applications on a family of applications and do nice things like remote updating etc.

>>I didn't say learning C is a waste of time
and I didn't say you say this