Thread: should I start with C++?

  1. #1

    should I start with C++?

    I'm starting off programming, should I start at C++, or a more basic language first?

  2. #2
    Used Registerer jdinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    That's really entirely up to you ( whether or not you think you're
    up to it ). A lot of programmers start off with VB then move to

    I started with Pascal then moved to learning C and VB at
    the same time ( not recommended, ah! the confusion I suffered!
    ). After about 6 months of that I stuck to strictly VB for about 2
    years. Then I moved on to C++.

    But keep in mind that's the path I took. You might be able to
    jump right in to C++ with no "primer" langauge under your belt
    and soar. There's definitely a ton of free info ( tutorials, articles,
    etc. ) on the internet. Not to mention that they are a lot of
    talented developers here who are glad to help out as long as
    you're not just asking for someone to do your work for you.
    Last edited by jdinger; 05-01-2002 at 08:51 PM.

  3. #3
    I'm Back
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    i say, go for it. Its no really such a big monster as people make it.

    after all there are simple c/c++ programs also. you dont just directly jump into complex confusing programs directly.

  4. #4
    Just because ygfperson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    consider my story:
    i grew up with gw-basic (6 yrs old). never wrote extensive programs with it because i didn't know how, it was difficult, and the "IDE" (microsofts basica interpreter) sucked. on the other hand i did write a clock which worked reasonably well (after i figured out just to black out the hands instead of clearing the screen between each refresh. 90% of the programs i did other than that were numerical stuff, like finding perfect numbers. (what fun on a 8.12mhz 8088!) basic is, like its name says, a beginners language.
    some problems with gw-basic (aka basica aka pre-qbasic basic):
    • needed line numbers. each line was incremented by 10. if a line needed to be added it was added in between two line numbers. (difficult if you needed something between lines 169 and 170)
    • run by an interpreter, making it really slow. working in graphics was especially slow
    • programs normally saved in a binary fashion, which didn't allow any other basic interpreters to read the file. (although a file could be saved as text)
    • no functions or subroutines of any kind. the closest thing was "GOSUB" which went to a line, did some stuff, and returned by a return statement.
    • the "DATA" command. all information is listed in order like so:
      10 DATA 3,"cat",4.5
      20 DATA 4,"dog",5.5
      60 READ A$: GOSUB 30
      the command "READ" read each record in sequencial order, resetting by a special command. how this even resembles anything useful i can't say. it goes against every programming principle i've heard of since.
    • the string notation. all strings needed a $ after the variable. it's much easier than the C/c++ version of a string, but it's not nearly as flexible.

    sometime later i found assembler. it's a bit of an extreme in the other direction. i never did anything beyond asking for numbers and printing them back.
    later on i found q-basic (aka quickbasic). qbasic is quickbasic altered a little to distribute with dos 5 and 6. quickbasic included a compiler which could work with or without the run-time library.
    some things about qbasic:
    • no more line numbers needed, although they could still be used
    • ide improved, resembles current ms-dos editor (which is actually a derivative of the qbasic text engine)
    • subroutines and functions actually exist now, although the actual use of them was small.
    • more graphics modes accessable. dos graphics are easily done (albeit slow) in qbaise

    after that i found "Visual Basic 3.0 standard ed". pros/cons of that:
    • easy to build interface, code
    • very inflexible concerning graphics
    • few useful controls(like a text box, or a button)

    but that was only version 3.0, pre win95 even. things have probably changed since then.
    and then i learned c, then c++, then lisp...

    suffice to say: learn c++. it's not as hard as you'd expect. just take a book, and read it through several times slowly, trying stuff out along the way, building programs to test aspects of the system, and maybe even some useful ones.
    Last edited by ygfperson; 05-01-2002 at 09:40 PM.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2001


    I say go for it,
    i found that, most things i learned in VB didnt help me much in programming in C++, i though it would be a breeze since, i thought it woul be easy, lol was i wrong.
    i say get C++ done, master it, ur probably going to need it more than VB any way. You can write easier with VB, but you cant do some of the more advanced stuff.

    i say go for C++

  6. #6
    Seņor Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Go for C++. I'm learning it right now, but I already had a class in qBASIC last year. It created more bad habits than you can imagine. I always want to use goto's (shunned in C++ but used all the time in basic) and while I was starting out I would screw up syntax left and right. Well, I've now cleared my urge for goto's and the C++ semicolons are like second nature now, but I think that I would have had an easier time if I hadn't had basic experience.

    The syntax (grammar) of C++ is very similar to C, Java, and C#, which are three of the main programming languages today. If you learn C++, Java should be pretty easy to learn. C++ is also a much more powerful language than the basic languages and it reinforces accepted programming habits. Oh yeah, I reccomend the book "Practical C++ Programming" published by O'Reilly. It really does a good job explaining the basics of C++. Also, take a class if you can. The best way to learn is actually talking with someone else. Typing is a pain.

  7. #7
    Registered User biosx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Go for C++ if you are ready to spend alot of time in it.

    I went from Pascal -> C -> C++. And in there was some PERL and VB.

    I say you start start with C. It is a somewhat small language and not so low-level that it will be hard (but not so much high-level that it hides stuff behind the scenes).

    Going from C to C++ isn't as easy as pepole think. You still have to learn Object Oriented techniques and ideas.

    So I say start with C then go to C++.

  8. #8
    Registered User heat511's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001

    it depends...

    i learned vb last year, and now am learning c++

    i kinda like vb because it teaches you the thought process behind programming, but you don't need to worry about syntax too much since its really simplistic

    On the other hand, now i sorta feel like i wasted a year on vb when i could have been learning c++, so i guess... go for it!

    and most importantly have fun or something

  9. #9
    Registered User geekfrog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Yeh, learn c++. if you dont enjoy it, or find it to be too hard, you can just stop! no harm done!

  10. #10 napkin111's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Do it, I learned BASIC (on a Cybiko, anyone remember those?), then HTML (if thats considered programming), and now I'm learning C++


Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Data Structure Eror
    By prominababy in forum C Programming
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-06-2009, 09:35 AM
  2. Adventures in labyrinth generation.
    By guesst in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-12-2008, 01:30 PM
  3. C++ gui for windows where to start
    By prixone in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-16-2006, 11:48 PM
  4. GNOME Desktop won't start (Mandriva)
    By psychopath in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-19-2006, 01:21 PM
  5. Start bar color in WinXP
    By confuted in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-03-2003, 06:18 AM