Keith Thompson wrote:
Wolfgang Draxinger <wd********@darkstargames.dewrites:
>BobR wrote:
>>Because C++ has class! :-}
And? You can do OOP also with pure C, too.
And?
The original article was inappropriately cross-posted to
comp.lang.c++ and comp.lang.c (as well as
comp.graphics.api.opengl and stl.general). Let's not allow a
spammer to trigger a C vs. C++ flame war, ok?
This was not meant to an offense, I just don't see, why the
existence of classes alone should let someone favour C++ over C.
C++ offers a lot of syntactic sugar, which C doesn't. Free
speach also applies to programming, so use the language you
favour. But don't use silly arguments to discriminate one
language over another.
That I don't use C++ in new projects anymore comes from the fact,
that it is deliberately difficult to develop helper tools, that
dig into the code and do the boring stuff for you. Oftenly it
ends in ugly hacks (gcc-xml) or in constrainging the language
features you may use in code that is to be
analyzed/extended/whatever by helper tools (see Qt and its MOC
for an example). Another thing, that C++ is lacking (IMHO of
course) is a basic support for complex data typed. Even for the
smallest array one has to develop his own container; well
there's STL, but by writing std::vector<your_typeyou're
practically expanding a macro adding _a lot_ of code that wants
to be compiled, too.
Anyway C++ is a great language and it has done a lot for the
computer sciences, but development never stops. Java was the
next step and C#, too. There are also other languages with high
potential, like D.
Never stop learning !!!
Wolfgang Draxinger
--
E-Mail address works, Jabber:
he******@jabber.org, ICQ: 134682867