]"I do not consider C++ to be much higher level language than C"
I have to strongly disagree with you there. C and C++ have NOTHING in common apart from the basic syntax.
There's no equivalent to RIAA in C, there's also no equivalent to stack unwinding or many of the other C++ constructs which are central to good C++ programming.
I'm currently working on a 200,000 line program which has exactly 9 'delete' statements in it and they're all in definitions of containers and magic pointers. I haven't seen a memory leak for years. Garbage collection? Who needs it?
Just thinking about using malloc/free/strcpy/strdup/etc. instead of std::string gives me the screaming heebie-jeebies. Same for std::vector vs. C arrays - aaargh!
Using STL frees you from having to do manual memory management. I imagine compilers do a far bit of string manipulation and put things in dynamically-sized buffers, all of which are prone to leaks, overflows and all the other evils of C.
I don't see what the problem with virtual functions is. He goes on and on about 'added overhead' but the overhead isn't added unless a programmer types the word 'virtual' somewhere in the source code. Presumably the programmer expects to get something in return for typing it... therefore the overhead is acceptable. QED.
Templates - how will they do STL without templates??? Seems like a big fail to me.
Exception handling... probably not needed in a compiler. A compiler isn't likely to want to recover from a fatal error.
RTTI... probably not needed either and usually quite easy to work around for the few cases a compiler might want it.
Sure it can be abused, if you're overloading operator+ to insert records in a database you're doing it wrong.
OTOH operator[], operator*, operator-> and even operator are fundamental to data processing - you can't remove them from C++ without doing a lot of harm.
Anybody who advocates removal of operator overloading has completely missed the point - yes they can be evil but the good far outweighs the bad.
The C++ bashers are an undereducated bunch of whiners. Telling a C++ programmer to go back to C is like telling a C programmer to go back to assembly language, not going to happen. Deciding how to allocate CPU registers to get the tightest loop might be fun for a while but it simply doesn't work when you've got to write a real program.
Just like C compilers which allocate registers for you (and do a pretty good job!), a C++ compiler makes coding MUCH EASIER and MORE RELIABLE by doing all the micromanagement for you.
Anybody who thinks "C++ is C with a few extra things" is very, very wrong.
Yes...one of the BIG wins in OO programming is that each class works like a mini namespace. It seems like a minor detail to the C++ bashers but in practice it removes a huge burden from the programmer - all function names can be short and logical.
On the other hand... having the compiler mangle the names for you instead of having to do it manually "MyClassAddFloatAndInt()" might be a win in the long term.
Maybe they've admitted that 'pride' is holding them back and that being able to use STL (for example) is a greater good than being able to do an initial compile on some obscure microcontroller which has a barely functioning C compiler.
Thinking even harder... they could compile GCC on another machine but set the output target as the platform they're trying to get it to run on. Then you just copy the binary across.
Anybody who follows the scientific method knows at least one mechanism for acupuncture, ie. placebo, and I don't think many would shake their heads in abject disbelief if you say "irritating some part the body will produce natural pain killers". The skepticism will appear if you start saying "it matters where you stick the needles" and stuff like that.
Real "pseudoscience" is stuff like astrology, water divining, channeling the dead, perpetual motion, expensive HiFi tweaks, etc.
They're much more likely to just look at the number/type of connections than start analyzing packets.
Packet inspection will only happen after you've been spawning dozens of connections on various ports for a few minutes and none of the headers were HTTP.
When I saw the Oscar Winner I went and downloaded a copy because I'd already forgotten the name of that boring movie I saw a few months ago. When I figured out which one it was I was, like "oh, THAT ONE won the Oscar???!?? what kind of morons were on the committee this year?" and deleted the file without even watching it.
Sitting in front of a computer/console all day has ZERO correlation with being a programmer. Some people sit all day on facebook and MSN messenger, does that mean they'd be good coders? Nope.
If he was cut out to be a programmer he'd more likely be taking the thing apart than playing games on it,
This is just some ISP's PHB having a wet dream after being wined and dined by the RIAA. It's going to be impossible to put into practice. I've heard the boss of Spain's leading ISP ranting about this sort of thing and he's a barely coherent old codger who obviously doesn't have a clue about anything technical.
As a protest we should create a screen saver which maxes out an Internet connection 24/7 transferring random data to random people. Get your friends to install it... let's see if the ISPs who sign up to these schemes can provide the bandwidth they've sold.
Murdoch? The same guy who bought one of the best newspapers in the world and turned it into a gossip-rag? He's going to employ proper writers to write for his audience? LOL!
He's had a robots.txt file for ages, quite why google wasn't in it we don't know....
I think he just like to make a lot of noise and pretend he's important enough that even Google has to do what he says - when he says "remove my content", they jump!!
The reality of editing robots.txt doesn't sound so impressive to Joe Public.
Slashdot Mirror
IOW ... you haven't bothered to learn C++ so you're relying on anti-C++ dogma in your rants. In other contexts that would be called 'religion'.
]"The life so short, the language fucking impossible to learn."
Impossible for YOU, maybe.
Yes...but can you tell me when either of those files is closed?
]"I do not consider C++ to be much higher level language than C"
I have to strongly disagree with you there. C and C++ have NOTHING in common apart from the basic syntax.
There's no equivalent to RIAA in C, there's also no equivalent to stack unwinding or many of the other C++ constructs which are central to good C++ programming.
I'm currently working on a 200,000 line program which has exactly 9 'delete' statements in it and they're all in definitions of containers and magic pointers. I haven't seen a memory leak for years. Garbage collection? Who needs it?
Just thinking about using malloc/free/strcpy/strdup/etc. instead of std::string gives me the screaming heebie-jeebies. Same for std::vector vs. C arrays - aaargh!
Using STL frees you from having to do manual memory management. I imagine compilers do a far bit of string manipulation and put things in dynamically-sized buffers, all of which are prone to leaks, overflows and all the other evils of C.
Aircraft electrics have been WiFi/phone safe for decades, if they weren't then every lightning bolt with 100 miles would be a threat.
The reasons for not allowing those things aren't to do with safety.
I don't see what the problem with virtual functions is. He goes on and on about 'added overhead' but the overhead isn't added unless a programmer types the word 'virtual' somewhere in the source code. Presumably the programmer expects to get something in return for typing it... therefore the overhead is acceptable. QED.
Templates - how will they do STL without templates??? Seems like a big fail to me.
Exception handling ... probably not needed in a compiler. A compiler isn't likely to want to recover from a fatal error.
RTTI ... probably not needed either and usually quite easy to work around for the few cases a compiler might want it.
(assuming you've got a decent C++ compiler...)
Seriously, how can you live without RAII, etc.?
Ummm... just right click the function name and select "Find all references" from the popup menu.
Sure it can be abused, if you're overloading operator+ to insert records in a database you're doing it wrong.
OTOH operator[], operator*, operator-> and even operator are fundamental to data processing - you can't remove them from C++ without doing a lot of harm.
Anybody who advocates removal of operator overloading has completely missed the point - yes they can be evil but the good far outweighs the bad.
The C++ bashers are an undereducated bunch of whiners. Telling a C++ programmer to go back to C is like telling a C programmer to go back to assembly language, not going to happen. Deciding how to allocate CPU registers to get the tightest loop might be fun for a while but it simply doesn't work when you've got to write a real program.
Just like C compilers which allocate registers for you (and do a pretty good job!), a C++ compiler makes coding MUCH EASIER and MORE RELIABLE by doing all the micromanagement for you.
Anybody who thinks "C++ is C with a few extra things" is very, very wrong.
Yes...one of the BIG wins in OO programming is that each class works like a mini namespace. It seems like a minor detail to the C++ bashers but in practice it removes a huge burden from the programmer - all function names can be short and logical.
On the other hand ... having the compiler mangle the names for you instead of having to do it manually "MyClassAddFloatAndInt()" might be a win in the long term.
Maybe they've admitted that 'pride' is holding them back and that being able to use STL (for example) is a greater good than being able to do an initial compile on some obscure microcontroller which has a barely functioning C compiler.
Thinking even harder ... they could compile GCC on another machine but set the output target as the platform they're trying to get it to run on. Then you just copy the binary across.
ie. They could use any of the current compilers for the 'bootstrap'...
Water divining has been debunked many, many times. In randomized tests nobody can do it.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7461912885649996034#
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOsCnX-TKIY
Fast: You can dig almost anywhere on Earth and find water, it's just a question of depth (keep on digging there until it appears).
Anybody who follows the scientific method knows at least one mechanism for acupuncture, ie. placebo, and I don't think many would shake their heads in abject disbelief if you say "irritating some part the body will produce natural pain killers". The skepticism will appear if you start saying "it matters where you stick the needles" and stuff like that.
Real "pseudoscience" is stuff like astrology, water divining, channeling the dead, perpetual motion, expensive HiFi tweaks, etc.
They're much more likely to just look at the number/type of connections than start analyzing packets.
Packet inspection will only happen after you've been spawning dozens of connections on various ports for a few minutes and none of the headers were HTTP.
When I saw the Oscar Winner I went and downloaded a copy because I'd already forgotten the name of that boring movie I saw a few months ago. When I figured out which one it was I was, like "oh, THAT ONE won the Oscar???!?? what kind of morons were on the committee this year?" and deleted the file without even watching it.
Apparently the MPAA could have sued me for that.
Welcome to the brave new world.
Sitting in front of a computer/console all day has ZERO correlation with being a programmer. Some people sit all day on facebook and MSN messenger, does that mean they'd be good coders? Nope.
If he was cut out to be a programmer he'd more likely be taking the thing apart than playing games on it,
This is just some ISP's PHB having a wet dream after being wined and dined by the RIAA. It's going to be impossible to put into practice. I've heard the boss of Spain's leading ISP ranting about this sort of thing and he's a barely coherent old codger who obviously doesn't have a clue about anything technical.
As a protest we should create a screen saver which maxes out an Internet connection 24/7 transferring random data to random people. Get your friends to install it ... let's see if the ISPs who sign up to these schemes can provide the bandwidth they've sold.
Just make sure all your windows are closed when you play the radio in your car and you should be OK.
Murdoch? The same guy who bought one of the best newspapers in the world and turned it into a gossip-rag? He's going to employ proper writers to write for his audience? LOL!
Let's hope so!
He's had a robots.txt file for ages, quite why google wasn't in it we don't know....
I think he just like to make a lot of noise and pretend he's important enough that even Google has to do what he says - when he says "remove my content", they jump!!
The reality of editing robots.txt doesn't sound so impressive to Joe Public.