hi I was just wondering why
#include <stdio.h>
is being replaced by
#include <stdio>
I was just wondering what the point of it was. Do people find it easier to skip the .h part? If anyone can answer my question thank you.
Printable View
hi I was just wondering why
#include <stdio.h>
is being replaced by
#include <stdio>
I was just wondering what the point of it was. Do people find it easier to skip the .h part? If anyone can answer my question thank you.
No, it's replaced by
#include <cstdio>
It is (I think) primarily to do with namespaces.
It's all part of the new C++ standard way of doing things.
is there a reason why though? I was just wondering
Is the question:
1. Is there a reason why the people that made the C++ standard made new header files without the .h?
or
2. Is there a reason why programmers use the new header files without the .h?
My answers:
1. Like Salem said, they wanted to redesign the standard library headers a little, so instead of changing how they were supposed to be implemented in the old filenames, they followed a new header file naming convention. As far as more detailed reasons on why they did this, I can't think of any specific places to get those answers right now.
or
2. Programmers use the files without the '.h' because they are the currently preferred headers according to the standard. The old standard C library headers are deprecated (they may not work on new compilers some time in the future). There are also old C++ library headers (like iostream.h) that aren't standard at all, so they might not work right now with a compiler that is strict about following the standard (most current compilers do allow the old headers for compatibility with old code).
Why do they make the old code not standard anymore, is it not as efficient as the new header files? They should only add on to the amount of header files. Like a english dictionary, it only gets larger with time.
Because they changed the way they do things. The language itself was poorly designed, they improved it, and eventually the old way is no longer legal.Quote:
Originally posted by gell10
Why do they make the old code not standard anymore, is it not as efficient as the new header files? They should only add on to the amount of header files. Like a english dictionary, it only gets larger with time.
They give a lot of time, many years, before they remove things, though. But sometimes, there is little choice.
They didn't, at least not for the older C library headers such as <stdio.h>, <stdlib.h> etc. Those were inherited from standard C, and as such they're standard C++. Every conforming C++ compiler provides them. They're deprecated, so support for them *may* be removed from a future version of the standard, but for now they are indeed standard C++ libraries. That said, you should prefer the newer C++ versions such as <cstdio>, <cstdlib> etc unless you have a good reason not to (e.g. backwards compatibility, maintaining old code).Quote:
Originally posted by gell10
Why do they make the old code not standard anymore
Headers such as <iostream.h> etc were never 'standard' in the first place until they were standardised by ISO in the C++ standard, as <iostream> etc. Many compilers still support the older versions for backwards compatibility, but otherwise you should prefer to use the standard headers.
Omnius, standard C++ is not just a superset of standard C. This is especially true of C99, but even before, not all valid C code was valid C++ code as well.
I'm well aware of that. Which part of my post were you disagreeing with?Quote:
Originally posted by Cat
Omnius, standard C++ is not just a superset of standard C. This is especially true of C99, but even before, not all valid C code was valid C++ code as well.