By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
455,462 Members | 1,466 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 455,462 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Hot Topic ----C and C#

P: n/a
Hi All,
i got a question from one of my friend who is working
in C, He asked me What you write in C# , I can write it in C , Why
there is so much of Hype for objects,

Can anyone give more insights on this

Thanks in Advance

thomson

May 11 '06 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
13 Replies


P: n/a
Seems that everything, but how much time it takes him for debugging it's
another question :)
Hi All,
i got a question from one of my friend who is working
in C, He asked me What you write in C# , I can write it in C , Why
there is so much of Hype for objects,

Can anyone give more insights on this


--
WBR,
Michael Nemtsev :: blog: http://spaces.msn.com/laflour

"At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not
cease to be insipid." (c) Friedrich Nietzsche

May 11 '06 #2

P: n/a
Thats True in the case debugging --requires lot of effort [ ], other
than that any other advantages in terms of being an object

May 11 '06 #3

P: n/a
* thomson wrote:
Hi All,
i got a question from one of my friend who is working
in C, He asked me What you write in C# , I can write it in C , Why
there is so much of Hype for objects,


Tell him what he writes in C you can write in assembler. Why is there
so much hype for C?
May 11 '06 #4

P: n/a
Thats true Mr Flibble,
Do we have anything solid to say

Thomson

May 11 '06 #5

P: n/a
thomson wrote:
i got a question from one of my friend who is working
in C, He asked me What you write in C# , I can write it in C , Why
there is so much of Hype for objects,
A lot of C programmers end up programming in such a way that
they're creating pseudo objects anyway; it's a logical and
structured way of writing code.
thomson


--
Chris Crowther
Developer
J&M Crowther Ltd.
May 11 '06 #6

P: n/a
On Thu, 11 May 2006 09:43:02 +0100, Mr Flibble wrote:
* thomson wrote:
Hi All,
i got a question from one of my friend who is working
in C, He asked me What you write in C# , I can write it in C , Why
there is so much of Hype for objects,


Tell him what he writes in C you can write in assembler. Why is there
so much hype for C?


Yeah but what you write in assembler, i can write in binary machine code.
Why is there so much hype for assembler?
May 11 '06 #7

P: n/a
* thomson wrote:
Thats true Mr Flibble,
Do we have anything solid to say


The point is use the right tool for the job, obviously.

If you want to compare the OO paradigm to the procedural read
http://tinyurl.com/l2gjx from comp.object.

Mr Flibble
May 11 '06 #8

P: n/a
Sure. The most expensive part of writing applications is paying human beings
to write code. The longer it takes to write the code, and the longer it
takes to maintain the code, the more expensive it is to create software. OOP
is simply another step in a long chain of steps that optimize the code
development process by organizing, combining, and modelling data and
process. This series of steps began with Assembler, then moved on to
higher-level languages. Functions and structs, for example, are a primitive
form of classes. They encapsulate data and process in a way that is easy for
human developers to identify and work with. OOP simply takes the model a
step further and improves on it.

And tell your friend that if he was more willing to study this on his own,
he wouldn't need to ask! ;-)

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
Professional Numbskull

Hard work is a medication for which
there is no placebo.

"thomson" <sa**********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11*********************@i39g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
Hi All,
i got a question from one of my friend who is working
in C, He asked me What you write in C# , I can write it in C , Why
there is so much of Hype for objects,

Can anyone give more insights on this

Thanks in Advance

thomson

May 11 '06 #9

P: n/a
I would say that the most expensive part is paying human beings to maintain the
code and correct bugs.

The time taking in writing a program is a small part of the cost in the overall
life of a product. The main thing is to get it right from the start, which will
reduce costs in the long run (this is a hard concept to get across to
bean-counters and management who are fazed by glossy and slick advertising).

Structured code is the way to go but this does not necessarily mean RAD.

I think that systems written in C# may turn out to be maintenance nightmares if
they are written in the style that is used in most examples in VS. There is an
overabundance of string literals eg row.Cells [ "Name" ], which cannot be
verified at compile time. It may take longer to write programs to use
identifiers, but this is preferable to having a program crash some years down
the track.

Kevin Spencer wrote:
Sure. The most expensive part of writing applications is paying human beings
to write code. The longer it takes to write the code, and the longer it
takes to maintain the code, the more expensive it is to create software. OOP
is simply another step in a long chain of steps that optimize the code
development process by organizing, combining, and modelling data and
process. This series of steps began with Assembler, then moved on to
higher-level languages. Functions and structs, for example, are a primitive
form of classes. They encapsulate data and process in a way that is easy for
human developers to identify and work with. OOP simply takes the model a
step further and improves on it.

And tell your friend that if he was more willing to study this on his own,
he wouldn't need to ask! ;-)

May 11 '06 #10

P: n/a
Anywhere you can get to in a 4x4 I can get to on foot. Just not as fast or
as comfortably.

--
Bob Powell [MVP]
Visual C#, System.Drawing

Ramuseco Limited .NET consulting
http://www.ramuseco.com

Find great Windows Forms articles in Windows Forms Tips and Tricks
http://www.bobpowell.net/tipstricks.htm

Answer those GDI+ questions with the GDI+ FAQ
http://www.bobpowell.net/faqmain.htm

All new articles provide code in C# and VB.NET.
Subscribe to the RSS feeds provided and never miss a new article.

"thomson" <sa**********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11*********************@i39g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
Hi All,
i got a question from one of my friend who is working
in C, He asked me What you write in C# , I can write it in C , Why
there is so much of Hype for objects,

Can anyone give more insights on this

Thanks in Advance

thomson

May 11 '06 #11

P: n/a

Good point Mr Flibble, but what if the nerd can program in Binary? Guess we
could only call him de-bugger! - sorry 'bout that...

- SpotNet

"Mr Flibble" <mr********@flibbyly.wobbly.n.et> wrote in message
news:e3**********@custnews.inweb.co.uk...
:* thomson wrote:
: > Hi All,
: > i got a question from one of my friend who is working
: > in C, He asked me What you write in C# , I can write it in C , Why
: > there is so much of Hype for objects,
:
: Tell him what he writes in C you can write in assembler. Why is there
: so much hype for C?
May 13 '06 #12

P: n/a
It's all about code organization. New programming paradigms (and the
associated hype) are all about ways to express complex solutions in
simpler "language" so that we can then take on even more complex
problems.

My C++ teacher worked for Nortel. He told us that their newest switches
were designed and built by teams in three countries: Canada, the U.S.,
and the U.K. The various teams interacted and integrated their work
using C++ header files (with lots of comments, of course). In C++ it's
possible to write a reasonably clear contract in the header file and
pass that off to someone else to have them write the code that
implements that contract. It's not foolproof, of course, but it's a
long step up from the days of C. However, it's not that C++ is somehow
"more expressive" than C. Rather, it's that C++ encourages you to
separate the specification of what a piece of code does (the header
file) from how it does it (the code), and it is that separation that
helped my teacher's company coordinate teams in different parts of the
world. In fact, he claimed that the code base was so large, and the
number of people involved so large, that it would simly have been
humanly impossible to have written the software in any other language.

And there's the rub. That's where your friend is wrong. He _can't_
write in C anything that an equally capable programmer could write in
C#. It's not that C is insufficiently expressive: it's certainly
expressive enough. It is, instead, that using the additional
organizational tools provided by OOP, an equally capable programmer
could write code complex enough that it would simply be beyond your
friend's human capacity to keep it all organized and make it work using
a non-OOP language.

OOP, then, isn't something we're doing for the computer. The computer
was, as several have pointed out, perfectly happy with assembly
language. It is, instead, something we're doing for ourselves as human
beings, to allow us to take on projects that before OOP were simply too
complex to pull off with a reasonable hope of success.

I programmed in C for 20 years. Now I'm a relative newbie in C#.
However, with only a year's experience in C# I can write very
sophisticated WinForms applications that are so complicated that
there's little chance that I would have gotten them working in C: I
would either have had to have settled for something less sophisticated,
or have ended up with a hopelessly buggy program. I can do more with
the language because it helps me organize my code well, whereas C
doesn't help me that way.

In the end, the problem is that we run up against our human
limitations: our limited ability to organize things and keep it all
straight. Faced with those limitations, we invent new ways to organize
our code, and then design languages that allow us to express ourselves
in those new ways. Which also means that OOP isn't the final answer;
it's just another step along the road.

May 13 '06 #13

P: n/a
_DD
On Thu, 11 May 2006 10:35:50 +0100, Mehdi <vi****@REMOVEME.gmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2006 09:43:02 +0100, Mr Flibble wrote:
* thomson wrote:
Hi All,
i got a question from one of my friend who is working
in C, He asked me What you write in C# , I can write it in C , Why
there is so much of Hype for objects,


Tell him what he writes in C you can write in assembler. Why is there
so much hype for C?


Yeah but what you write in assembler, i can write in binary machine code.
Why is there so much hype for assembler?


Less keystrokes, too.
May 26 '06 #14

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.