|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
> Yes, you should generally pick one approach within a module. I would
> definitely recommend avoiding the mixture of these two string approaches
> within a given application. BTW, If you wanted to trash the lack of good
> string support in the C++ language, I would NOT disagree there.
lol
but that's not worth doing, because I know nobody would argue, and
that's no fun.
> This is like saying that if C is was so good, why would anybody still program
> in assembly. For some people/projects assembly language is still the
> simplest/most efficient way to do things. That doesn't mean everyone should
> program in assembly, or that you should always mix C/assembly. For most
> people, C++ should allow people to write better, easier to read, and
> sometimes even faster code with fewer lines of code. That doesn't mean "why
> would anybody still program in straight C". And, just because you can write
> better code in C++ doesn't mean you automatically will.
YEs but trying to do both at once is a mess. Kung-fu is a good fighting
style, maybe shodokan is too, but you have to pick one and use it for
any particular fight, or your ass will be kicked. Having C and C++
being totally different and yet integrated could be useful for adding
OOP to C programs (and in a way similar to my statement before that I
would like a compiler system that could compile different procedures of
different languages into one program), but also invites programmers to
make a mess, something that C already allows to a large extent.
-- noah silva
______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|