C is too old? opinions?

[Lasse Espeholt]

Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i
thinks it is obsolete...

The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into
eachother i don't like... Look at C# which is much cleaner with
namespaces.

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

Something like:

a_source_file.c :

namespace SomeName(.SomeN ame)
{
area Stack
{
private int[] myStack;

private void someMethod() {};

public void push(int i) {};
public int pop() {};
}
}

another_source_ file.c:

using SomeName(.SomeN ame);

int main(int argc, char[] *argv)
{
Stack.push(10);
System.printf(S tack.pop());
}

I'm really annoyed ;) Is im the only own with that point of view?

If i was a really good programmer (which i'm not... yet! ;)) i would
developed a compiler and a much more simple (but still impressive and
powerfull) c...

Best and kindest regards
Lasse Espeholt

[Lasse Espeholt]

On 2006-07-12 23:44:20 +0200, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanfor d.edusaid:

Lasse Espeholt writes:

>On 2006-07-12 23:29:50 +0200, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanfor d.edusaid:

>>Lasse Espeholt writes:

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?
It sounds like you can get what you want from C++.

There is still the header issue which i'm not a fan of... I can get rid
of header files but it is still recommended, right?

I don't think there is a practical way to write large C or C++
programs without using header files. If you want to avoid header
files entirely, you'll need to move to something like C# or Java.

If C# can, C also can ;).... i can't see any problems ?

[Lasse Espeholt]

On 2006-07-12 23:48:41 +0200, Andrew Poelstra <ap*******@nowh ereat.allsaid:

On 2006-07-12, Lasse Espeholt <Lassewrote:

>Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i
thinks it is obsolete...

Nah; in fact, a new standard was released around 1999, and it still
isn't implemented widely because the features from 1989 are still
perfectly useful today!

>The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into
eachother i don't like... Look at C# which is much cleaner with
namespaces.

C++ has namespaces. You could try over there.

>Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

If you qualify a function with `static', it isn't visible outside
of the file that it is defined in.

>>
I'm really annoyed ;) Is im the only own with that point of view?

Around here, probably. :-)

>If i was a really good programmer (which i'm not... yet! ;)) i would
developed a compiler and a much more simple (but still impressive and
powerfull) c...

There was a guy who did that... Bjarne Strousup, they called him.
(Although `they' knew how to spell his name properly.)

yeah.... Bjarne Stroustrup is from my planet (Denmark, NOT the swedish
capital) ;)

hhm... i'm sadly the only one whom does not like C structure very much :D

[Andrew Poelstra]

On 2006-07-12, Lasse Espeholt <Lassewrote:

On 2006-07-12 23:44:41 +0200, Andrew Poelstra <ap*******@nowh ereat.allsaid:

>On 2006-07-12, Lasse Espeholt <Lassewrote:

>>On 2006-07-12 23:29:50 +0200, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanfor d.edusaid:

Lasse Espeholt writes:

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

It sounds like you can get what you want from C++.

There is still the header issue which i'm not a fan of... I can get rid
of header files but it is still recommended, right?

I'm not sure what you mean by that. No, you shouldn't eliminate header
files. C++ has what you want with namespaces. What is "still recommended,
right"?

I thought that header issen't nessesary in c++ but recommended, but i'm
not a c++ developer so...

Headers aren't technically necessary in C, either... it's still a
terrible idea to try and get along without them.

--
Andrew Poelstra <http://www.wpsoftware. net/projects/>
To email me, use "apoelstra" at the above domain.
"You people hate mathematics." -- James Harris

[Andrew Poelstra]

On 2006-07-12, Lasse Espeholt <Lassewrote:

On 2006-07-12 23:44:20 +0200, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanfor d.edusaid:

>Lasse Espeholt writes:

>>On 2006-07-12 23:29:50 +0200, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanfor d.edusaid:

Lasse Espeholt writes:

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?
It sounds like you can get what you want from C++.

There is still the header issue which i'm not a fan of... I can get rid
of header files but it is still recommended, right?

I don't think there is a practical way to write large C or C++
programs without using header files. If you want to avoid header
files entirely, you'll need to move to something like C# or Java.

If C# can, C also can ;).... i can't see any problems ?

Untrue. Think carefully about that statement, and consider why C and
C# are different languages.

--
Andrew Poelstra <http://www.wpsoftware. net/projects/>
To email me, use "apoelstra" at the above domain.
"You people hate mathematics." -- James Harris

[Lasse Espeholt]

On 2006-07-12 23:59:02 +0200, Andrew Poelstra <ap*******@nowh ereat.allsaid:

On 2006-07-12, Lasse Espeholt <Lassewrote:

>On 2006-07-12 23:44:20 +0200, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanfor d.edusaid:

>>Lasse Espeholt writes:

On 2006-07-12 23:29:50 +0200, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanfor d.edusaid:

Lasse Espeholt writes:
>
>Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
>fields could be hidden from the outside?
It sounds like you can get what you want from C++.

There is still the header issue which i'm not a fan of... I can get rid
of header files but it is still recommended, right?

I don't think there is a practical way to write large C or C++
programs without using header files. If you want to avoid header
files entirely, you'll need to move to something like C# or Java.

If C# can, C also can ;).... i can't see any problems ?

Untrue. Think carefully about that statement, and consider why C and
C# are different languages.

I know why they are different, but in this case it is true

[Lasse Espeholt]

On 2006-07-12 23:52:55 +0200, Richard Heathfield
<in*****@invali d.invalidsaid:

Lasse Espeholt said:

<snip>

>I'm looking for the simplicity of c# without objects ;)

Then C is the wrong place to look. C has objects. So does C++, so it's
no good looking there, either.

Object-orientated, classes then....

[Lasse Espeholt]

On 2006-07-12 23:58:00 +0200, Andrew Poelstra <ap*******@nowh ereat.allsaid:

On 2006-07-12, Lasse Espeholt <Lassewrote:

>On 2006-07-12 23:44:41 +0200, Andrew Poelstra <ap*******@nowh ereat.allsaid:

>>On 2006-07-12, Lasse Espeholt <Lassewrote:
On 2006-07-12 23:29:50 +0200, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanfor d.edusaid:

Lasse Espeholt writes:
>
>Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
>fields could be hidden from the outside?
>
It sounds like you can get what you want from C++.

There is still the header issue which i'm not a fan of... I can get rid
of header files but it is still recommended, right?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. No, you shouldn't eliminate header
files. C++ has what you want with namespaces. What is "still recommended,
right"?

I thought that header issen't nessesary in c++ but recommended, but i'm
not a c++ developer so...

Headers aren't technically necessary in C, either... it's still a
terrible idea to try and get along without them.

I think its workds great in other languages...?

[Lasse Espeholt]

On 2006-07-12 23:52:12 +0200, Richard Heathfield
<in*****@invali d.invalidsaid:

Lasse Espeholt said:

>Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i
thinks it is obsolete...

Fine, so don't use it. Nobody is forcing you to.

>The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into
eachother i don't like...

Since C doesn't have methods, the problem doesn't arise.

>Look at C# which is much cleaner with namespaces.

No thanks.

>Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

Because the language definition doesn't say it has.

<snip>

>If i was a really good programmer (which i'm not... yet! ;)) i would
developed a compiler and a much more simple (but still impressive and
powerfull) c...

Nobody is stopping you.

nobody forcing me - no, but in some cases C is a wonderfull
language.... don't get me wrong... i don't hate the language... it is
infact one of my favourites but i think some things could be done
better... i think it has some things there issent nessesary in modern
languages... for example header files...

hhm... it is correct that nobody is stopping me, but i stops myself...
I'm not good enogh....

best regards

[Default User]

Lasse Espeholt wrote:

Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i
thinks it is obsolete...

What you think is largely irrelevant. C isn't going anywhere, and is
still the language of choice for many applications.

The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into
eachother i don't like... Look at C# which is much cleaner with
namespaces.

Gawd. If you must have that, C++ is a far better idea.

Brian

[Lasse Espeholt]

On 2006-07-13 00:19:03 +0200, Ian Collins <ia******@hotma il.comsaid:

Lasse Espeholt wrote:

>On 2006-07-12 23:58:00 +0200, Andrew Poelstra <ap*******@nowh ereat.all>
said:

>>>
Headers aren't technically necessary in C, either... it's still a
terrible idea to try and get along without them.

I think its workds great in other languages...?

They have rules to enforce application layout and/or complex object
names that include a search path. What would you rather have:

path.to.some.ex ternal.wibble.a ();

or

#include "wibble.h"

a();

I like to have namespaces and using... ;)