Slashdot Mirror
Someone on Medium Just Said C++ Was Better Than C (medium.com)
Developer David Timothy Strauss is publishing a call to code "straightforward, easy-to-reason-about approaches" -- in an essay titled "Choosing 'Some C++' Over C". (Alternate title: "C++ for Lovers of C."
The problem with just picking C++ is that most criticism of it is legitimate. Whether it's the '90s-era obsession with object orientation and exceptions or the template errors that take up an entire terminal window, there have been -- and remain -- rough edges to C++. But, these rough edges are avoidable, unlike the problems in C that get worse with modern event and library programming.
The opinionated essay calls for "adopting a subset of C++ to smooth out C's rough edges," arguing that C++ offer a better, type-safe approach for event-driven design (as well as destructors to avoid memory allocation leaks). Are there any readers who'd like to weigh in on the advantages of C versus C++?
Not quite, it is in fact undefined.
C++ is the post-increment operator, it increments the variable, but then returns the original value. Therefore, since C started out as 0x11, C++ will evaluate to 0x11 while modifying C to be 0x12 as a aside effect.
Therefore, if you were > optimistic you could try to claim that "C++ < C", expecting the operations to be evaluated left-to-right and thus be evaluated as "0x11 < 0x12". However, C++ doesn't specify the evaluation order of operators, which means that "C" might end up being evaluated before "C++", in which case the comparison would be evaluated as "0x11 < 0x11" instead. The only thing you can be sure of is that C++ will NOT be greater than C.
Basically, as a rule of thumb you should never modify a variable within a line of code if the value of that variable will matter anywhere else within that same line. http://en.cppreference.com/w/c... - discusses undefined behavior halfway down the page.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
It also has good features, many of which provide you with an alternative to the bad features of C.
Constructors/destructors (RAII) > manual initialization/deinitialization.
Smart Pointers (made possible by RAII) > raw pointers
Polymorphism > function pointers
Templates > macros
If you are subscribing to a streaming movie service and you have the choice between netflix and a site that only allows you to watch "Armageddon (1998)", does it make sense to choose the latter because netflix has more bad movies? No of course not, because you don't have to watch the bad movies on netflix, and you can even choose only to watch movies better than Armageddon.
C++ is netflix. Nobody watches all the movies. Everyone watches the movies that are good from their point of view (even though many of those people are just wrong).
In exchange for manual memory allocation, C++ gives you automatic memory allocation: lots of it.
Nonsense. You don't get memory allocation unless you ask for it.
When resources are scarce (eg. IOT devices) this overhead can be a show stopper.
You're misinformed. With C++11 move semantics, you can have both safe, automatic ownership management, and no unnecessary dynamic allocation. Most of my work is done in a very constrained environment, where I have only a handful of pages of heap... or in some cases none at all. C++ is awesome for such environments.
Something that C++ advocates seem to ignore there is no free lunch.
No one is claiming that there is. What there is, is the opportunity to delegate tedious and error-prone due diligence that C programmers have to do themselves to the compiler. For example, you know all those functions that have comments describing whether the returned data structure's contents are owned by the caller or the library? In C++ you can write the function so that it's impossible for the caller to avoid taking ownership when that's what you want, or so that it's impossible for the caller to believe it has ownership when the library is retaining it. If the caller gets it wrong, the compiler will flag the error. That's one example, there are many, many more. C++ enables you to have buffers and strings that do automatic bounds checking... or even to write code such that potential bounds violations are flagged by the compiler, making run-times bounds checks provably unnecessary.
There's no magic here, just language constructs that allow you to accurately specify the semantics you want, which the compiler can enforce.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.