Invisible wrote:
>>     I would say learning C++ is easier than C.
>>
>>     Seriously,

	Bunch of people have already answered, but I might as well add to the 
mix. I'll just add that I made the statement comparing C++ with C. Many 
of your complaints seem to be more along the lines of C++ vs <Some other 
language>.

	Keep in mind I'm not a C++ expert.

> Manual memory management? 

Easier in C++ than in C.

> Pointers vs references? 

	References are easier. Use them unless you need a pointer.

 > Copy constructors and assignment constructors?

	OK. Perhaps a pain. I haven't dealt with this much elsewhere so I don't 
know how bad it is.

> The macro preprocessor? 

	C++ was designed to minimize the uses of the preprocessor. I think it's 
used for stuff like header guards, but off hand I'm not sure of any 
other important uses (and would like to be educated...).

> Method overrides that don't actually override unless you insert special code?

	Same amount of confusion as everyone else.

> Templates?

	*Using* templates make life much easier. I haven't coded them much, so 
I can't comment on that.

> Untrapped numeric overflows? Unchecked array indicies?

	Same as in C.

	I'll grant that C & C++ have their pains. Yes, as you said, the 
programmer is expected to know what he/she is doing. But why do you 
think you can't program that way? You'll be bitten a few times, and 
you'll learn from those mistakes and not make them again later.

	I'd never ask someone to do a project in C++ if Java/Python/something 
else will do the job. However, knowing C++ has its benefits: Namely 
getting a job. My assertion is that it simply is something you *can* learn.

	Trust me, I know it's a pain with the wrong resources. I first tried 
learning it over 10 years ago and had to deal with the compilers I had 
on me not handling the very code in the book I was learning from. The 
DOS C++ compiler would give an error. The Windows version would give me 
a General Protection Fault (3.1 days) - both were Borland products. Very 
discouraging. I wish I could find that book now to see if it was illegal 
code.

	Then when I was at university, they made me write everything in a text 
editor (when I was used to a very helpful IDE for all my coding), and 
use an "obscure" command line tool for compilation (g++). And what's 
more, for some crazy reason, all my a.out files would be 700K - even a 
simple "Hello world" program.

	And I tried a number of times since then to learn it, always giving up. 
Until, of course, the last time.

	In retrospect, the reason was not that the problem was with me, but 
with the resources: Bad tools and bad books.

	If you do stuff with vectors, you generally don't need arrays. You 
don't get a lot of the bugs that arrays provide. You don't need to know 
the size of the vector at compile time. You can grow a vector. I believe 
you can insert an element in the middle of a vector.

	You probably don't need to use pointers and code your own linked list. 
The standard library has it for you.

	But yes, of course, if you want to know C++ well enough, you should 
learn references and pointers.
	

-- 
Lisa: Oedipus killed his father and married his mother.
Homer: Who payed for THAT wedding?


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl

Post a reply to this message