Re: Cool

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Cool
by Lars Roland on Thursday 23/Sep/2004, @16:08

Ahh I love the C vs. C++ fight.

I wonder if any of you people have even looked at the dbus code ?? - I have and it looks well written, so why not just accept that some cool programs is written in C and others in C++ (and Haskell, and Java, and C#, and ....).

As for the 30-40 year old technology, I can tell you that this old stuff powers most of the operating system kernels around the world today (inluding Linux, FreeBSD and big parts of the NT kernel) - but then again you can always try to convince Linus, Alan and the rest of the Linux gang to rewrite it in C++.

Ohh do you really mean that reading C++ is easier than C ?. Given that the grammars/lexical defenitions for C++ is much more complex than C, and most people writing programs in C++ only have marginal understaning of the language.

Related Links

·   Articles on Qt
·   Also by Lars Roland
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: Cool
by peter neuberger on Thursday 23/Sep/2004, @17:43

> I wonder if any of you people have even looked at the dbus code ?? - I have and it looks well written, so why not just accept that some cool programs is written in C and others in C++ (and Haskell, and Java, and C#, and ....).

last time I checked there was glib code pasted into it, but that was like a year ago or so. Overall I wasn't impressed.

> Ohh do you really mean that reading C++ is easier than C ?

Sure it is. Every C++ program follows roughly the same rules. On the other hand for every C library that I use you have to learn a new "object emulation model" or some more or less crazy API.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Cool
by koos on Thursday 23/Sep/2004, @17:51

> C++ is much more complex than C
Yeah, try reading the boost libraries. Even the STL files, in/usr/include/c++/, can be hard to follow. But don't get me wrong, the result is _very_ powerfull both in features as in speed. But indeed KDE's includes are easy to read.
Actually I was quite happy to only have to recompile libfam and Qt/KDE, when upgrading gcc from 3.3 to 3.4. Not to mention the compile time difference. Long live C, and may every library, that I don't have to use, be implemented in C. And which I do use, well mostly it doesn't really matter.

What's really a swamp is building on top of win32, because you don't know what beneath you (and you get sucked away as soon as it becomes too popular).

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Cool
by stl on Thursday 23/Sep/2004, @18:09

I find the stl easier to read than most C libraries(lets say glib). Qt/KDE you can almost read like a book.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Cool
by koos on Friday 24/Sep/2004, @02:17

You probably choose the most expensive super market, because the vinegar is much cheaper there then the bordeaux wines from price fighter mega store next door :-)

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Cool
by stl on Friday 24/Sep/2004, @15:20

No, I chose to drive a car(C++) rather than riding on a horse(C) to work.
But seriously, I know it is hard to compare C libs to C++ libs because there is not very often 2 libraries for the same thing. I chose stl vs glib, because they do roughly the same, I/O, containers, string.

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"Don't code today what you can't debug tommorow." -- Ariya Hidayat
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.