Moving from C to C++

Hi! I'm new to these forums, so first of all, hello!

I just finished taking two first year university courses introducing me to C (We used The Art and Science of C and Programming Abstractions in C by Eric Roberts). Anyway, I'd like to "upgrade" to C++ because it seems to be better organized and easier to manage. Is there an article somewhere that can show for me the C++ counterparts of most common C items? One thing that's already confused me is the whole cout and cin thing. They seem to be functions, but aren't structured like a function. I know how to use the basics of them, but don't really understand what they are. If anyone could help me out, that'd be great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tweeres04

Hi! I'm new to these forums, so first of all, hello!

I just finished taking two first year university courses introducing me to C (We used The Art and Science of C and Programming Abstractions in C by Eric Roberts). Anyway, I'd like to "upgrade" to C++ because it seems to be better organized and easier to manage. Is there an article somewhere that can show for me the C++ counterparts of most common C items? One thing that's already confused me is the whole cout and cin thing. They seem to be functions, but aren't structured like a function. I know how to use the basics of them, but don't really understand what they are. If anyone could help me out, that'd be great.

---

The tutorials right here on cprogramming.com are pretty informative. This one helped me quite a bit, also:

http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/

I made the same move earlier this year because of college (did
C last year and C++ was on the course for this year). I did a
quick search on google and i came up with this, the start of
which lists some of the basic differences.

The main things, as i see it, are:

C++ introduces a concept called object orientation. Simply put,
this is the combination of attributes (variables) and methods
(functions) which describe and represent an object. The easiest
and quickest example is modelling a bank account: Attributes
might be the account balance, account holders name, interest
rate, and then methods, which are a way to interact with the
object, such as making a lodgement, cashing a check etc. These
objects involve data encapsulation - the idea that for an object,
the only way to manipulate the attributes is via the methods.

Basically, an object is like a black box - you shouldn't be able to
get into it, you don't know how it does what it does, but that
shouldn't stop you from using it. The advantages of this style of
programming are numerous: It allows companies to design code
that performs logical functions, code becomes more portable,
code can be reused, extended, or shortened, and also,
programmers have more control over how their code is used.

to make a crude comparison that is intuitively accurate from what
i have described, in C speak, an object can be thought of as
having attributes grouped together in a struct, but only a certain
collection of functions are allows modify that stuct - the stuct
will be out of scope as far as all other functions are concerned.
That is OOP in a nutshell.

Features - C++ versus C

C++ is a much more detailed language than C. As above, OOP is
allowed, dynamic memory allocation is greatly simplified, strong
type checking is built in - assignments of incompatible types
produce compilation errors, simplified file I/O, References - a
partial alternative to pointers with a far simpler syntax, improved
string support using the string class (i never mentioned that the
word class is used in C++ when declaring an object - so i did it
here), support for generic programming using the Standard
Template Library (a group of classes that act as "containers" for
any data type - sheer genius), built in error handling mechanisms
(exception handling it's called), namespacing (another part of
breaking code into logical divisions) and last but not least,
inheritance - classes can inherite attributes and functionality
from other classes, and functions can be redesigned as necessary
which allows for a substantial amout of code reuse on large
projects.

Well i said it was a detailed language! The last, probably most
important feature is the fact that because C++ was developed
from C, the C++ language is ALMOST a complete superset of C,
with the exception of a few items that would be legal in C but
illegal in C++, for example, due to the strong typechecking
features. Also, C++ is not a pure object oriented programming
language due to the fact that it maintains compatibility with C,
where as Java is much more object oriented.

One more feature which deserves a special mention is operator
overloading. This is where an object is defined, and the
programmer can design how those objects behave when they
are combined with arithmetic operators such as +,-, and even
[]. The great thing about this is that the person using the object
can make intuitively sensible code - a brief example is the
string class. You are probably familiar strcat and strcpy, but using
operator overloading, "adding" one string to another acts like
strcat, and using the equals sign to assign the result to another
is like strcpy.

Well thats all i have for you, so to answer your question on cout
and cin, well they stand for console out and console in - they
are actually objects, and the syntax of writing to the screen
using cout using the binary shift operator << is actually an
implementation of the overloading i just spoke about, and
intuitively respresents "shifting" text into the object, resulting in
it being displayed on screen, or shifting a value in from the
console into your variable.

Man thats a long post, but i hope you find it interesting and
motivating, and detailed enough for you as well. Good luck
on entering the world of C++. I leave you with this link to the
man who designed C++ - Bjarne Stroustrup

http://public.research.att.com/~bs/C++.html

I would consider starting fresh with your C++ learning, and not basing it on what you learned in C. Even though C++ is a superset of C, they are very different languages in how they are best used. IMO, too many C++ programmers write C++ code as if they are writing C code with classes. You will learn more techniques and tools if you don't try to map what you know in C to what you know in C++.

One of the few books that teach C++ techniques from the beginning is Accelerated C++. It is called accelerated for a reason, so if you don't want something that moves too fast, it might not be right for you, but it does start you off with modern C++ instead of C based techniques.

Quote:

---

too many C++ programmers write C++ code as if they are writing C code with classes.

---

Yup -- I'm guilty of that :)

Awesome, thanks for all of that, especially richie. A lot of help. Now at least I have some sort of idea of what needs to be learned. I'll also keep in mind that I should try to not program in C using classes. :D
Thanks again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ancient Dragon

Yup -- I'm guilty of that :)

---

I'd like to say I'm guilty of that, but unfortunately, I write both C and C++ much more comparably to a smoldering pile of poo.

OO programming isn't restricted to any particular programming language. I know this C guy who uses a myriad of function pointers in structs to simulate member functions :D;)

OO is a concept. Even the converse is not true. You don't need OO to program in C++.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tweeres04

Awesome, thanks for all of that, especially richie. A lot of help. Now at least I have some sort of idea of what needs to be learned. I'll also keep in mind that I should try to not program in C using classes. :D
Thanks again.

---

And forget everything you think you know about i/o.. dynamic memory.. strings... arrays... casting.. C++ Does it all quite differently... You're really starting a whole new language, all from scratch :)

In my opinion C++ is a waste of time and space for all but
a few applications.
I have the 'inventors' book and found it pretty incomprehensible.
C++ is to programming what bicycles are to fishes.

Looks for the laughs out loud smilie and notices it is not there, a bit like writing code in C++!!

C++ is actually a "multi-paradigm" language. There are bascially 3 seperate paradigms within C++:

• C: plain 'ol procedural programming
• Object Oriented: Classes, inheritance, polymorphism, encapsulation, etc
• <Generic> programming: templates, containers, the STL, boost and (omg teh n0es) template metaprogramming (if you don't know what this is, now is not the time to learn)

most beginners start with C and move to a mix of C and OO (c with classes). As they progress they move more to OO and eventually to a mix of OO and generic programming. Advanced programmers know when to use all 3 aspects.

"multi-paradigm" :rolleyes:
C++ is a language for salesmen.

>> In my opinion C++ is a waste of time and space for all but a few applications.
Do you know any C++?

>> I have the 'inventors' book and found it pretty incomprehensible.
Which book is that? It is true that there are not a lot of good beginner C++ books available, although I'm not sure how well that correlates to C++ being inappropriate for programming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esbo

"multi-paradigm" :rolleyes:
C++ is a language for salesmen.

---

ok I didn't respond to your first post 'cos I thought you were joking, but in the grown up world we sometimes use words longer than 5 letters. Yes, C++ is a "multi-paradigm" language, or in words you can understand, C++ allows you to do things in different ways.

Honestly, if you're going to post on a C++ board that "C++ is a waste of time and space", you should try to have something that resembles a rational arguement to back it up.

>> I have the 'inventors' book and found it pretty incomprehensible.
Your own stupidity does not make C++ a bad language.

>> C++ is to programming what bicycles are to fishes.
wow, what an insightful comment! I'm never going to write another line of C++ due to your intelligent, reasoned argument. Oh, hang on, there wasn't one.

C++ has its faults (many of which it inherited from C). It's not a perfect language and it's not suited to every task (these days I generally prefer Python for most programming tasks), but as a highly efficient real-world systems level language, nothing comes close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaosEngine

ok I didn't respond to your first post 'cos I thought you were joking, but in the grown up world we sometimes use words longer than 5 letters. Yes, C++ is a "multi-paradigm" language, or in words you can understand, C++ allows you to do things in different ways.

Honestly, if you're going to post on a C++ board that "C++ is a waste of time and space", you should try to have something that resembles a rational arguement to back it up.

>> I have the 'inventors' book and found it pretty incomprehensible.
Your own stupidity does not make C++ a bad language.

>> C++ is to programming what bicycles are to fishes.
wow, what an insightful comment! I'm never going to write another line of C++ due to your intelligent, reasoned argument. Oh, hang on, there wasn't one.

C++ has its faults (many of which it inherited from C). It's not a perfect language and it's not suited to every task (these days I generally prefer Python for most programming tasks), but as a highly efficient real-world systems level language, nothing comes close.

---

I am not stupid, I just don't like things being made overly
complex or verbose?
Why don't I like C++? Well because basically I don't need it.
Other than // for comments it has no benefits for me, I don't
need to reinvent the wheel because I already have round wheels.

Yes C++ allows me to do things I don't need to do in the first
place, but what is the point of that?
What benefits does C++ give me that I actually want or need?
Thats the question. All it appears to do is make have to write
lots of code and learn lots of 'paradigms' which serve no
purpose whatsoever.

At the end of the day all C++ appears to be is nothing wrapped
up in big words and any arguement to say otherwise usually
consists of another wrapper of even bigger words.
So sorry I just don't get it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esbo

I am not stupid, I just don't like things being made overly
complex or verbose?
Why don't I like C++? Well because basically I don't need it.
Other than // for comments it has no benefits for me, I don't
need to reinvent the wheel because I already have round wheels.

Yes C++ allows me to do things I don't need to do in the first
place, but what is the point of that?
What benefits does C++ give me that I actually want or need?

---

perhaps if you took a little time to study the concepts behind C++, you'd understand that you gain a lot more than "// for comments"

To take a simple example: let's say you have a function that adds 2 "things" together and prints the result.

in C you have to write a function for every type you want to use

Code:

---

void AddAndPrint_Int(int arg1, int arg2)
{
    printf("%d", arg1 + arg2);
}

void AddAndPrint_Floatfloat arg1, float arg2)
{
    printf("%f", arg1 + arg2);
}

void AddAndPrint_String(const char* arg1, const char*arg2)
{
    char buffer[1024]; /* hope have enough space here */
    strcpy(buffer, arg1); /* hope arg1 is null terminated */
    strcat(buffer, arg2); /* hope arg2 is null terminated */
    printf("%s", buffer);
}

struct Date
{
    int Day;
    int Month;
    int Year;
};

void AddAndPrint_Date(const Date* arg1, const Date*arg2)
{
    Date result = SomeDateAddingFunc(arg1, arg2);
    printf("%d/%d/%d", result);
}

---

if we decide we want to AddAndPrint any other type (complex numbers for instance) we need to write another AddAndPrint function.

in C++:

Code:

---

template <typename T>
void AddAndPrint(const T& arg1, const T& arg2)
{
    std::cout << arg1 + arg2;
}

---

that code will work for ints, float, strings and any other type that supports op << and op +

now tell me which is more verbose?

Firstly I would not want to add and print, I might want to add or print,
but not both.
A google on AddAndPrint returns 70 entries so it doesn't exist does it?
You have to write that first and you left that out.
It returns 1 entry from the UK, a lot of the 70 are not in English.

a=b+c;
printf("%d",a);
printf("%c",a);
printf("%f",a);
printf(%s%s",b,c);

The above covers most of your examples in 5 lines, and less characters than your
example which omits the 90% of the code you will have to write to make your
program work!!

It's like me saying, in C, program to play mp3 file:-

playthismp3file(mp3file);

I think there is a bit more to it than that!!! :)

OK maybe I misunderstood that a bit, but as I say
a=b+c;
printf("%d",a);
printf("%c",a);
printf("%f",a);
printf(%s%s",b,c)

covers most of it. And basically you are going back to BASIC.
I admit there may be some benefits in the compiler or the compiled
prog doing some of the extra work for you (with a slow down in speed)
but its all the classes, objects and other garbage I have a major problem with.

I'm sure AddAndPrint was just an example; there's plenty of other reasons why templates can be useful. For another example, what if you want to have a list of objects? In C, you'd need to rewrite your list functions for each type you needed to store. In C++, you can do this:

Code:

---

std::list<std::string> stringList;
std::list<int> intList;
std::list<MyType> myTypeList;

---

And then, when you're done with the list, you don't have to remember to call a cleanup function to release the memory you've allocated; the destructor gets called implicitly when the object goes out of scope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esbo

Firstly I would not want to add and print, I might want to add or print,
but not both.
A google on AddAndPrint returns 70 entries so it doesn't exist does it?
You have to write that first and you left that out.
It returns 1 entry from the UK, a lot of the 70 are not in English.

a=b+c;
printf("%d",a);
printf("%c",a);
printf("%f",a);
printf(%s%s",b,c);

The above covers most of your examples in 5 lines, and less characters than your
example which omits the 90% of the code you will have to write to make your
program work!!

It's like me saying, in C, program to play mp3 file:-

playthismp3file(mp3file);

I think there is a bit more to it than that!!! :)

---

are you deliberatly misunderstanding? AddAndPrint was a simple example of a function, it's not a real world function!

Quote:

---

I admit there may be some benefits in the compiler or the compiled
prog doing some of the extra work for you (with a slow down in speed) but its all the classes, objects and other garbage I have a major problem with.

---

and what is your problem with it? in a lot of cases C++ "classes and garbage" can be FASTER than c!

let's take the string class as an example. let's say we want to concatenate strings in a loop

Code:

---

/* cat.c */

int main()
{
    char buffer[1024]; /*again praying we have enough space*/
    int numStrings = 0;
    char loopString[20]; /* just a short string */
    int i =0;
    printf("please enter a string to repeat\n");
    scanf("%s", loopString);

    /* have to initialise our buffer */
    memset(buffer, 0, 1024);

    /*hopefully it'll be less than 20 chars otherwise we
    a) crash, the best result or
    b) we get one of those lovey buffer overrun security holes that plague IE */

    printf("enter a number of times to loop\n");
    scanf("%d", &numStrings);

    for (; i < numStrings; i++)
    {
        strcat(buffer, loopString);
    }

    printf("%s", buffer);
}

---

now leaving aside the verbosity, insecurity and general buggyness of such code, let's analyse the performance characteristic of the loop.

Code:

---

    for (; i < numStrings; i++)
    {
        strcat(buffer, loopString);
    }

---

what exactly is happening here? strcat first searchs for buffer's null terminator (NT), so it loops from 0 to NT. then it copies from loopString. with each loop iteration buffer gets longer and strcat takes longer and longer to execute.

now let's look at the C++ version

Code:

---

int main()
{
    // don't need to initialise or worry about size 
    std::string buffer;
    std::string loopString;
    int numStrings = 0;

    cout << "please enter a string to repeat"\n;
    cin >> loopString;

    cout << "enter a number of times to loop\n";
    cin >> numStrings;
 
    for (int i = 0; i < numStrings; i++)
    {
        buffer += loopString;
    }

    cout << buffer;
}

---

it's cleaner, terser, more secure and easier to change.
but again, let's analyse the performance characteristic of the main work, the loop.

Code:

---

    for (int i = 0; i < numStrings; i++)
    {
        buffer += loopString;
    }

---

because buffer is now an object, it internally knows it's size. so when we do += the code generated simply starts copying at the end of the string, there's no searching for the NT, so it's actually FASTER!!

if you still don't understand, there's no hope for you.

There is nothing like a programming argument.

C has much easier syntax and can do lots of things that C++ can, so I really don't see why esbo's preference is a problem for anyone. Moreover, you're judgement of C++ being such an improvement is a little misfounded. There isn't that much that's totally new.

"C++: creating an octopus by nailing extra legs to a dog."

>> if we decide we want to AddAndPrint any other type (complex numbers for instance) we need to write another AddAndPrint function.
Imitating a template is possible: you can just create a function with void pointers in C.

>> let's take the string class as an example. let's say we want to concatenate strings in a loop
A fine choice, classes at their best! However, a C programmer probably would not take the risks you are suggesting, and do most of the work in file I/O.

Not that I care or anything. ¬.¬ Don't totally bash C because it is a little dated. It still works very well.

C shines more in embedded development. I happen to work on motorola processor now and I was thinking how a switch to C++ would benefit us. It just doesnt at all, even after removing all the initial larger memory footprint problems. This board has 256k working memory, try putting all your objects that keep track of of their own state in there....

C++ shines more in application development for bigger projects, but tbh, I'd use java or another more modern language there

>> C has much easier syntax and can do lots of things that C++ can, so I really don't see why esbo's preference is a problem for anyone.
esbo didn't state a preference. He simply came on here trolling and made a stupid post that C++ is a waste of time and space. I've tried to educate him or at least get him to present a reasonable argument. I now see this is a total waste of time.

>> Moreover, you're judgement of C++ being such an improvement is a little misfounded.
I'm not saying C++ is perfect or even better than C in every environment (I actually work developing an emulated embedded platform in C++ that runs embedded C code). If you read my previous posts you'd see I agree that C++ has it's flaws and I actually use python for most tasks now.

That said, if you come on this board and post that "C++ is a waste of time and space" without backing it up and if you can't see the benefits of C++ over C, you're an idiot. Most of the best embedded C programmers I know (and I know some top-notch guys with 20 years c programming behind them) end up emulating C++ features in C. Hell one of them even wrote virtual function tables to emulate polymorphism. You CAN do these things in C, but it's easier and cleaner in C++ so why not let the compiler do the work? that's what computers were invented for! esbo talks about not reinventing the wheel, and then goes out of his way to rewrite in code something C++ gives you for free!

>> Imitating a template is possible: you can just create a function with void pointers in C.
and that is exactly the kind of hacky unsafe code that gives C such a bad reputation.

>> This board has 256k working memory, try putting all your objects that keep track of of their own state in there....
as the monty python guys would say...
luxury, our board has 96k! Of course C is the language for that environment, but that's an external constraint. Given the choice, most intelligent developers will use the highest level language possible for the job. If you don't, you're wasting your employers time and consequently, money and you should be fired.

Is C++ the reason software upgrades run 10-100 times slower than the did prior
to 'upgrade'?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esbo

Is C++ the reason software upgrades run 10-100 times slower than the did prior
to 'upgrade'?

---

yes it is. you should stick to writing C. in fact, write assembly. This will magically make your programs run faster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaosEngine

>> C has much easier syntax and can do lots of things that C++ can, so I really don't see why esbo's preference is a problem for anyone.
esbo didn't state a preference. He simply came on here trolling and made a stupid post that C++ is a waste of time and space. I've tried to educate him or at least get him to present a reasonable argument. I now see this is a total waste of time.

>> Moreover, you're judgement of C++ being such an improvement is a little misfounded.
I'm not saying C++ is perfect or even better than C in every environment (I actually work developing an emulated embedded platform in C++ that runs embedded C code). If you read my previous posts you'd see I agree that C++ has it's flaws and I actually use python for most tasks now.

That said, if you come on this board and post that "C++ is a waste of time and space" without backing it up and if you can't see the benefits of C++ over C, you're an idiot. Most of the best embedded C programmers I know (and I know some top-notch guys with 20 years c programming behind them) end up emulating C++ features in C. Hell one of them even wrote virtual function tables to emulate polymorphism. You CAN do these things in C, but it's easier and cleaner in C++ so why not let the compiler do the work? that's what computers were invented for! esbo talks about not reinventing the wheel, and then goes out of his way to rewrite in code something C++ gives you for free!

>> Imitating a template is possible: you can just create a function with void pointers in C.
and that is exactly the kind of hacky unsafe code that gives C such a bad reputation.

>> This board has 256k working memory, try putting all your objects that keep track of of their own state in there....
as the monty python guys would say...
luxury, our board has 96k! Of course C is the language for that environment, but that's an external constraint. Given the choice, most intelligent developers will use the highest level language possible for the job. If you don't, you're wasting your employers time and consequently, money and you should be fired.

---

I backed up my my reasons for beleiving C++ is largely a waste of time and space, without being insulting, which I believe is
against the rules here.

You can read this supposedly 'joke' interview with C++'s
creator.
http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/susan/joke/cpp.htm

A joke maybe, but many a true word is spoken in jest.
And you can write absolute rubbish code in any language so
even if it were true it would give C++ no advantage over C.

Are you arguing that C++ is a waste of time and space because it is difficult to learn? What if you have already learned how to use C++'s extra features to your advantage? IMO, using C and adding the safeguards and flexibility that comes automatically with C++ would be a waste of time and space if you already knew how to utilize those tools in C++, I don't know how you could argue otherwise. So that would mean that C++ is a waste of time to learn, in your opinion.

That is fine, of course, if you feel it is a waste of your time, but that doesn't mean it is a waste of time and space for everybody, or in the general case.

That article started this whole debacle? esbo, I think it's a safe wager that neither of us were alive in the 70's. A great deal of that article does not apply to us. C's a great language, but C++ is important now these days too. At least tolerate the language and the people who write it.

Bzzzzzzzzt! "esbo" is clearly just trolling, save your typing. He/she probably also trolls christian forums quoting satanic worship material too :)

I don't think that anybody is here to argue that C is rubbish and
C++ is fantastic - neither is true. The truth is, every language
has its virtues and flaws - esbo gives out about the speed of C++
programs - take a look at java and come back then!

Seriously, the development of C++ has led to improvements in
C, as ANSI attempts to make the two languages more in line
with each other - i mean, strong type checking is bound to be
intoduced into standard C eventually - i don't see anything
wrong with that, do you?

Don't dismiss something because it doesn't suit you - advice that
applies in all facets of life, but not the easiest to implement. C++
is almost a complete superset of C - you don't have to write
code using the string class or the STL - you don't even have to
use objects if you don't want to - C++ gives you a choice. What
can be said of C in that context? If you want versatility of style,
then C++ is the way to go.

The joke article was most probably written by a C++ programmer.
Stroustrup defends C++ staunchly - heck i would too because
it is something to be proud of.

As already mentioned, well written C++ programs can be just
as efficient as C - if you have performance issues, perhaps
you are using an outdated microsoft compiler, or have no concept
of optimisations.

The system of classes is pure genius in my opinion. If you
disagree on the basis of performance, then that's fine, but
really - what can you possibly find wrong with the idea of
emulating real world objects? Just earlier on i was thinking about
physics, and the importance of modelling a system in a
mathematically accurate way - breaking it into well defined
portions, and understanding how those portions affect each
other? C++ approaches programming in that method. I can't
think of any way to simplify it - grouping functions and data just
makes sense to me - and clearly to a lot of other people too, C++
is probably more popular than C on this site.

That's my view on the subject, i don't try and force it down
anyones throat, i just accept the two languages, good and bad,
and be glad that i have a choice of methods to approach a
programming task - C++ is by no means the be all and end all
of the programming world, and thank God for that!

Now one more thing - this thread has been rudely hijacked as
a result of esbo's initial post - thats not very fair now is it? Just
a thought.

>> I backed up my my reasons for beleiving C++ is largely a waste of time and space,
Show me where.

>> without being insulting, which I believe is against the rules here.
you made a baseless attack on C++ and by extension those who use it. I found that insulting.

>> That article started this whole debacle?
no esbo's accusation (which he has yet to provide anything resembling a logical argument to back up) started this whole debacle.

>> C's a great language
no, it's really not anymore. It has it's uses in certain fields (embedded development mostly), but (in the general case) these days the only reason to C is if the only other alternative is assembly. It's not that it's a bad language, it's just been superceded by better alternatives. Unless you are working in a severely memory constrained environment, there is nothing you can do in C that cannot be done better in C++.

>> neither of us were alive in the 70's
hey some of us were! :p

At this point, I've better things to do than waste anymore time trying to educate esbo. I comfort myself with the fact that I'll hopefully never have to interact with his code.

"Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"

Well I have knocked up a program in C to analyse poker hands (similar to Pokertracker
if you are an online poker player), it has to parse over 30,000 hands (text files).
I dread to think how long it take to run in C++.
I can't really think of any benefits C++ would have offered me in writing it and the
few that can think of would probably slowed it down considerably. I can't think of a single
think which could be an 'object', or of any uses for any of the other more bewildering
concepts in C++.
This is not a forum entitled 'praise C++', criticism is equally valid, if you want a forum
purely to sing the praises of C++ then you should make that clear. I am entitled to my opinion of C++ and you are entitled to disagree with it. However I don't need to use
personally insults to back up my arguements, because in reality they don't back up
an arguement, they weaken it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esbo

Well I have knocked up a program in C to analyse poker hands (similar to Pokertracker
if you are an online poker player), it has to parse over 30,000 hands (text files).
I dread to think how long it take to run in C++.
I can't really think of any benefits C++ would have offered me in writing it and the
few that can think of would probably slowed it down considerably.

---

I know I shouldn't but...

that is not presenting an argument. You have made 2 baseless assumptions about a language you admittedly know nothing about apart from some vague fear that it'd be slow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esbo

I can't think of a single think which could be an 'object',

---

You're joking, right? This is an easy candidate for an OO design.
I thought of 3 when you said "poker":
card, deck, hand. Any of those sound like "objects" to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esbo

or of any uses for any of the other more bewildering
concepts in C++.

---

I'll presume since you're pretty much ignorant of C++ as a language you're not talking about any of the truly scary C++ stuff (e.g. template metaprogramming) and focus instead on things like templates and the STL.

Here's a start for you: you probably have some sort of array or linked list to represent a deck or hand? You could use a vector for this. Presumably you have an algorithm to shuffle the deck? STL has random_shuffle that'll randomly reorder your deck WITHOUT causing duplicates.

I can almost guarentee your poker hand analyser could be re-written cleaner, shorter and quicker in C++.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaosEngine

>> C's a great language
no, it's really not anymore. It has it's uses in certain fields (embedded development mostly), but (in the general case) these days the only reason to C is if the only other alternative is assembly. It's not that it's a bad language, it's just been superceded by better alternatives. Unless you are working in a severely memory constrained environment, there is nothing you can do in C that cannot be done better in C++.

---

as you said C has a very distinct use still in some fields. C++ on the other hand hasnt because in fields where you would say it can be better done in C++ it can always be done even better in another more high level language. IOW, C has been superceded by C++ in terms of application development, but C++ has long since been superceded by even better languages

C++ is more an academic toy, I use it just for hobby

/* grabs popcorn */


You use a car to navigate land, and a boat to navigate water. You can also use a car to navigae water and a boat to navigate land, but undefined behaviour will result. :rolleyes: Esbo the old fisherman is arguing against the usefulness of cars and everyone else are arguing against the usefulness of boats. I'll just sit back, grab a soda and enjoy the show.

Actually, I made the mistake of talking. I just wanted to make my opinion and my preference known. A programmer doesn't even get to choice how he gets his job done. You will code in whatever your boss wants you to code in. So it would be good to know a lot of languages; making everything we're yelling about moot.

Quote:

---

C++ is more an academic toy, I use it just for hobby

---

It is obvious from that stupid idotic statement that you are absoletly clueless about the topic. Go home and play with your craylos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ancient Dragon

It is obvious from that stupid idotic statement that you are absoletly clueless about the topic. Go home and play with your craylos.

---

:cool: I used it at work for 7 years only to find out app development can be done way faster and just as performant in other languages.

let bjarne stroustroup and his buddies discuss the merits of
partial templatized function arguments with default arguments with protected inheritance from pure virtual baseclasses with default implementations. Then others can make actual programs :)

Quote:

---

let bjarne stroustroup and his buddies discuss the merits of
partial templatized function arguments with default arguments with protected inheritance from pure virtual baseclasses with default implementations. Then others can make actual programs

---

I admit there are some features of c++ that I hate and never use -- templates is one of them. Sure, I'll use a few from stl but I don't bother to write my own or use template from other sources (at least not that I know of). By the time I figured out how to write the template I could have had the whole program written! But that doesn't mean the whole c++ language is something to be ignored and used only as a toy.

>> everyone else are arguing against the usefulness of boats.
Actually, "everyone else" is only saying that in many cases (such as navigating land) cars are better than boats by explaining that a car has wheels, for example, built-in that make maneuvering over land easier. Nobody is arguing against the usefulness of boats in certain situations, just defending and explaining the usefulness of cars.

Interesting thread.

I consider myself a low-intermediate programmer, and I'd like to ask the pros on the board a question.

I am interested in finite state automata/transducers, and I'm curious which you guys is think is better for developing such stuff. C or C++?

And if you think there's an even better language than C/C++ for developing fsa, please enlighten me.

We use a FSM for our embedded development here. One of the developers recently refactored our FSM code to be a heirarchical FSM. During this process he replicated several C++ features (mostly polymorphism) in C using virtual function tables. He reckoned he could've done it in about half the time in C++.

As for an even better language, it depends. If you're not particulary resource constrained, (i.e. you're not looking at anything soft-realtime), I generally believe Python is a better language for most things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cunnus88

Interesting thread.

I consider myself a low-intermediate programmer, and I'd like to ask the pros on the board a question.

I am interested in finite state automata/transducers, and I'm curious which you guys is think is better for developing such stuff. C or C++?

And if you think there's an even better language than C/C++ for developing fsa, please enlighten me.

---

I would say the safe option is C if you don't know C++, or maybe
use C++ and ignore it's more bewildering concepts?

C++ is fine is you ignore the bits which are not C :D

Quote:

---

"multi-paradigm" :rolleyes:
C++ is a language for salesmen.

---

When explaining OO concepts to my juniors, I describe the various terms as 'marketing hype' :D
That said, if not for the marketing hype, it would be more difficult to express the concepts.

Anyway, esbo, note that you need to introspect when you write that you "don't need to use
personally insults to back up my arguements, because in reality they don't back up
an arguement, they weaken it."

Did you not insult both C++ programmers and salesmen?

Quote:

---

use C++ and ignore it's more bewildering concepts?

---

You have not addressed ChaosEngine's points.

Quote:

---

C++ is fine is you ignore the bits which are not C

---

Unless there are exceptional reasons otherwise, using C++ and avoiding the Standard Library is just giving yourself a handicap.

Quote:

---

As for an even better language, it depends. If you're not particulary resource constrained, (i.e. you're not looking at anything soft-realtime), I generally believe Python is a better language for most things.

---

Sorry, ChaosEngine, Python is a language for salesmen too :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laserlight

Sorry, ChaosEngine, Python is a language for salesmen too :P

---

if so, call me a salesman. :p

Can I interest you in productivity gains? you'll shed days off your deadline and your code will be readable as never before! but wait, there's more! call today and receive free platform independance! Pay by credit card and we'll throw in a massive StandardLibrary(tm)!
and if you're still not satisfied, fire up Boost.Python and integrate with C++! See http://www.python.org for more details

warning: use of python may cause depression when you're forced to go back to other languages.

:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ancient Dragon

I admit there are some features of c++ that I hate and never use -- templates is one of them. Sure, I'll use a few from stl but I don't bother to write my own or use template from other sources (at least not that I know of). By the time I figured out how to write the template I could have had the whole program written! But that doesn't mean the whole c++ language is something to be ignored and used only as a toy.

---

when you work with other programmers you often have no choice. One is cooler than the other by knowing more C++ features so he writes a ........load of partially specialized templates.....and then he leaves the company.....and then there's a bug in it. happy debugging, or on our platform where we dont have a source debugger....happy code reading

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Laserve

when you work with other programmers you often have no choice. One is cooler than the other by knowing more C++ features so he writes a ........load of partially specialized templates.....and then he leaves the company.....and then there's a bug in it. happy debugging, or on our platform where we dont have a source debugger....happy code reading

---

if you are less knowledgeable than an other developer, you should aspire to his level, not drag him down to yours.

I work with mostly C programmers in an embedded environment. They're excellent in their field, but I can safely say I'm more knowlegdeable about C++. That's ok, 'cos they know way more than me about embedded development. I don't expect them to maintain my code if I leave, anymore than I could maintain theirs. Does that mean I limit my use of C++ to a minimum? Of course not. I use the language features I deem appropriate (including partially specialised templates). If I leave, the company should find another senior C++ engineer to replace me, not expect other developers to absorb the load.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaosEngine

if you are less knowledgeable than an other developer, you should aspire to his level, not drag him down to yours.

I work with mostly C programmers in an embedded environment. They're excellent in their field, but I can safely say I'm more knowlegdeable about C++. That's ok, 'cos they know way more than me about embedded development. I don't expect them to maintain my code if I leave, anymore than I could maintain theirs. Does that mean I limit my use of C++ to a minimum? Of course not. I use the language features I deem appropriate (including partially specialised templates). If I leave, the company should find another senior C++ engineer to replace me, not expect other developers to absorb the load.

---

becoming a senior in C++ engineer takes way longer than other environments. They are harder to find and therefore cost more money and all that for a language that tries most to compete in the field of application programming. It would cost a company way less if they use a more modern application programming language.
Let's suppose a not so senior engineer is the only option and he has to fix code from a previous senior who liked to use all C++ features cos thats the cool thing to do. (dont even try to deny it ^^) debugging that code takes longer and therefore costs more money. When a language is a bit more restrictive in redundant features, people dont get the chance to abuse them.

Quote:

---

When a language is a bit more restrictive in redundant features, people dont get the chance to abuse them

---

So, by that theory everybody should write html code because its the most restrive language with the least features I can think of. :)

HTML has features now? ORLY? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Laserve

becoming a senior in C++ engineer takes way longer than other environments. They are harder to find and therefore cost more money and all that for a language that tries most to compete in the field of application programming. It would cost a company way less if they use a more modern application programming language.
Let's suppose a not so senior engineer is the only option and he has to fix code from a previous senior who liked to use all C++ features cos thats the cool thing to do. (dont even try to deny it ^^) debugging that code takes longer and therefore costs more money. When a language is a bit more restrictive in redundant features, people dont get the chance to abuse them.

---

That is orthogonal to your point. I have already stated several times that I don't think C++ is the best language ever, I don't think ANY language is the best for all situations.

I don't believe that C++'s features are "redundant". Of course, they can be abused, but you can abuse basic if you want to.

A senior engineer should be replaced by a senior engineer. That's true in ANY language. Besides, one of the principles of OO is seperation of interface from implementation. I may very well write a complicated partial specialised template, but if it is contained behind a well-documented interface, even a junior engineer should be able to use it. I use boost.python a lot. I've looked at the code and I confess it's written by C++ developers a quantum level beyond my ability (for now :p ). I couldn't have written it, but I can certainly use it.

And yes I do deny that I use C++ features because it's "cool". C++ has never been cool. If I wanted to be cool, I'd use Java or C# (not necessarily bad languages, but certainly have a lot more "cool" factor).