[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: Why is C so popular?

On Wednesday 27 August 2003 07:27, Paul Johnson wrote:
> I do have to ask this one:  It's possible to write
> non-braindamaged code in C++ without learning C first?

Yes.  But I think it's more fun to learn OO using Python than it is using C++.

And now to over-analyse the term "brain-damaged".

Mixing C style (e.g., functions and data structures) and techniques (e.g., 
CPU and memory awareness) in C++ code (with its abstractions using 
hierarchical objects and templates) is "brain-damaged" to some critics.

But even if you use C++ correctly, your object space may be conceived in a 
way that is different from how you critic perceives the object space.  In 
this case your code will be "brain-damaged"

Solution? Learn C because it's the lingua franca and it works well. The OO 
learning curve with Python is manageable, so learn Python to build OO 
solutions.  Java is probably a great OO choice too - I haven't cracked that 
nut yet.  The Sun control of Java seems a little...closed...to me.

C++ works perfectly for me precisely because it is a mixes C and C++ so 
easily.  I work on a bit-oriented protocol (C part) that I manage with some 
OO techniques (C++ part).  I think my code will earn a place of honor in the 
"brain-damaged" C++ hall of fame.

Recently SCO showed some "offending" code and the chuck was determined to be 
a memory allocator written by some UNIX and C progenitors.  Linus said it was 
removed from 2.6 by someone because it was judged to be "ugly".  Ugly. 
Brain-damaged. Crappy. Nasty.  What's the difference?  Code that is deemed 
beautiful or clever is often either incomprehensible or obvious.

Code that works is a gift.
Mike Mueller
324881 (08/20/2003)
Make clockwise circles on the floor with your right foot; now, without 
looking at your foot, use the index finger on your right hand to draw the 
number "6" in the air

Reply to: