Good development practices

[Nickolai Leschov]

Hello,

I have done some programming, mostly on embedded systems but now I would
feel like I have to learn good development practices (i.e programmer's
good manners). Let's say I want to build an application using some
established open source library or application. Do I just download the
source and hack away? Or I'd better do it in some controlled manner, i.e
set up some source control system so that I can always compute the diffs
from the original code? Or maybe I should try to keep my changes
separate from the original code base? How do I do it?

Where do I learn about things like that? I'm sorry for asking this here,
where we dicuss standard-compliant C/C++ programming, but I really don't
know any other place now. I do program in C/C++.

Regards,
Nickolai Leschov

[Victor Bazarov]

Nickolai Leschov wrote:

[..] I
would feel like I have to learn good development practices [..]

Where do I learn about things like that? I'm sorry for asking this
here, where we dicuss standard-compliant C/C++ programming, but I
really don't know any other place now. I do program in C/C++.

news:comp.sofwa re-eng.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Lew Pitcher]

On Jan 17, 2:03 pm, Nickolai Leschov <nlesc...@gmail .comwrote:

Hello,

Hi, Nickolai

[snip]

Where do I learn about things like that? I'm sorry for asking this here,
where we dicuss standard-compliant C/C++ programming, but I really don't
know any other place now. I do program in C/C++.

OK, first thing is to recognize that there is no such thing as
"standard-compliant C/C++ programming", because there is no standard
that defines something called "C/C++".

However, there /are/ standards for the C language, and /different/
standards for the C++ language. You are going to have to choose which
language you want to learn about wrt "standard-compliant" programming.
If you are planning to program in /both/ C and C++, you'll have to
learn both standards, and a bunch of things about inter-language calls
(which, IIRC, the C++ standard talks about, but the C standard does
not).

Having said all that, neither comp.lang.c nor comp.lang.c++ seem to me
to be the best place to discuss the theory of "standard-compliant
programming". Both of these newsgroups discuss the practice of
"standard-compliant programming", and try to leave the theory to other
groups.

HTH
--
Lew

[Malcolm McLean]

"Lew Pitcher" <lp******@teksa vvy.comwrote in message

>
OK, first thing is to recognize that there is no such thing as
"standard-compliant C/C++ programming", because there is no standard
that defines something called "C/C++".

Standards-compilant C/C++ would be a language that anyone would call C, or C
with a few twiddles, but actually conforms to the C++ standard.
Many thousands of such programs are written.

--
Free games and programming goodies.
http://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm

[Martin Ambuhl]

Malcolm McLean wrote:

>
"Lew Pitcher" <lp******@teksa vvy.comwrote in message

>>
OK, first thing is to recognize that there is no such thing as
"standard-compliant C/C++ programming", because there is no standard
that defines something called "C/C++".

Standards-compilant C/C++ would be a language that anyone would call C,
or C with a few twiddles, but actually conforms to the C++ standard.
Many thousands of such programs are written.

Or a language that anyone would call C++, or C++ with a few twiddles,
but actually conforms to the C standard. Many thousands of such
programs are written.

Your parochialism is showing. The fact is that there is no C/C++
language, and no standard to conform to. Not to bother with the obvious
point that the expression 'C/C++' is a violation of the standards of
either C or C++.

[Michael DOUBEZ]

Nickolai Leschov a écrit :

Hello,

I have done some programming, mostly on embedded systems but now I would
feel like I have to learn good development practices (i.e programmer's
good manners). Let's say I want to build an application using some
established open source library or application. Do I just download the
source and hack away? Or I'd better do it in some controlled manner, i.e
set up some source control system so that I can always compute the diffs
from the original code? Or maybe I should try to keep my changes
separate from the original code base? How do I do it?

Where do I learn about things like that? I'm sorry for asking this here,
where we dicuss standard-compliant C/C++ programming, but I really don't
know any other place now. I do program in C/C++.

You can learn some of it from de Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu:
http://www.amazon.fr/Coding-Standard.../dp/0321113586

Michael

[Nickolai Leschov]

Victor Bazarov wrote:

news:comp.sofwa re-eng.

Thank you. I'm subscribing.

[Nickolai Leschov]

Lew Pitcher wrote:

>
OK, first thing is to recognize that there is no such thing as
"standard-compliant C/C++ programming", because there is no standard
that defines something called "C/C++".

However, there /are/ standards for the C language, and /different/
standards for the C++ language. You are going to have to choose which
language you want to learn about wrt "standard-compliant" programming.

Yes, I know what is C and what is C++, they are different languages, I
just wrote "C/C++" to save time, not because I think they are the same
or something like that.
Please don't be so pedantic. You know what I meant, don't you?

My question is about good practices applicable to both C and C++,
(that's why I post this to both newsgroups) with emphasis on "good
practices", not "C/C++"

Having said all that, neither comp.lang.c nor comp.lang.c++ seem to me
to be the best place to discuss the theory of "standard-compliant
programming".

This is the term I used to name the topic of discussions in this
newsgroup is I see it. I mean programming in the language, not specific
implementation.

[Bart van Ingen Schenau]

On Jan 18, 11:01 am, Nickolai Leschov <nlesc...@gmail .comwrote:

Lew Pitcher wrote:

OK, first thing is to recognize that there is no such thing as
"standard-compliant C/C++ programming", because there is no standard
that defines something called "C/C++".

However, there /are/ standards for the C language, and /different/
standards for the C++ language. You are going to have to choose which
language you want to learn about wrt "standard-compliant" programming.

Yes, I know what is C and what is C++, they are different languages, I
just wrote "C/C++" to save time, not because I think they are the same
or something like that.
Please don't be so pedantic. You know what I meant, don't you?

Actually, no we did not know that.
There are just too many people about who really think that there is a
language called "C/C++" to assume that a poster knows about the
distinction between C and C++ when he uses the term C/C++.

And if you can't stand pedantery, comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++ will
not meet your tastes, because they are full of it.

To answer your original questions:
- Using source control is always a good idea. Agood source control
system lets you easily find out when and why certain changes were
made. This I use often in finding the cause of bugs that I try to
solve.
- When writing an application that uses third-party software (open
source or not), you should regard the third-party software as 'read-
only'.
Even if you are allowed to, writing your application intermixed with
library code is likely to break all sorts of things. In the very
least, it breaks the principle of modularity.

Bart v Ingen Schenau

[jkherciueh]

Bart van Ingen Schenau wrote:

On Jan 18, 11:01 am, Nickolai Leschov <nlesc...@gmail .comwrote:

>Lew Pitcher wrote:

OK, first thing is to recognize that there is no such thing as
"standard-compliant C/C++ programming", because there is no standard
that defines something called "C/C++".

However, there /are/ standards for the C language, and /different/
standards for the C++ language. You are going to have to choose which
language you want to learn about wrt "standard-compliant" programming.

Yes, I know what is C and what is C++, they are different languages, I
just wrote "C/C++" to save time, not because I think they are the same
or something like that.
Please don't be so pedantic. You know what I meant, don't you?

Actually, no we did not know that.
There are just too many people about who really think that there is a
language called "C/C++" to assume that a poster knows about the
distinction between C and C++ when he uses the term C/C++.

[snip]

I think your claim is plain false. I never met someone who "really think(s)
that there is a language called 'C/C++'". Also, I have never encountered
the case that a poster using "C/C++" reacted with even the slightest amount
of surprise when informed that there is no language that goes by the
name "C/C++". I wonder if there are, say, three threads from the archive
where it actually transpires that a poster thaught there is a language
called "C/C++". Could you quote even one? (Maybe, there is a difference in
comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++. My observation is based upon the C++ group.
So, it could be possible that the C forum is teeming with posters who
actually think C/C++ does name a language.)

All that I have observed is that there are some people who regularly
_pretend_ that those using the phrase "C/C++" do refer to some language of
that name. That joke was funny the first time I saw it, but it wears off
over the years.
Best

Kai-Uwe Bux

ps.: Come to think of it, maybe there is a C/C++ language. I think Comeau
offers a compiler for that one :-)