quote:Original post by Diodor
I like the C header files way more than the ugly C++ header files. If in a C++ header you add tons of private stuff noone needs to know about, in C you just add a function or three.

What, no variables?

That points to one of the perceived "deficiencies" of C - the fact that the data you operate on is dispersed throughout the application and vulnerable to modification from a thousand places (which also makes it harder to trace some bugs).

quote:I like C because there aren''t so many namespaces. Not confusing at all. Everything global and that''s it.

Not anymore, my friend. See C99.

quote:An advantage is that making minor architecture changes is trivial. Try splitting a C++ class that you derive another class from that you derive another class from in two separate structures.

If you need to do that in C++, your design was probably bad in the first place and you should be punished for it. However, it''s very possible:

class A; // original base classclass B : public A; // original derived class.// refactored design:class A1;  // new split implementationclass A2;class A : public virtual A1, public virtual A2;class B : public A; 

Remember, we have multiple inheritance too.

quote:I like the C naming conventions. In C you always know at all times what functions and variables come from what module. Browsing through code is a lot easier. I don''t have to keep track of the class a function belongs too. I also find having different functions names for different param types helpful. All the info I need I can get from reading the code.

I don''t get this. You''re saying we can''t get where a function comes from in C++? Let''s see:

// C:void Draw(Sprite *pSprite);void Draw(Obj3d *pObject);...// C++void Sprite::Draw();void Obj3d::Draw(); 

Not only is the C++ clearer in establishing relationships, it also is easier to use in loops in conjunction with either inheritance (make the function virtual) or RTTI (which C plain doesn''t have). Unless, of course, I totally misunderstood your point (in which case I apologize).

Don''t get me wrong, I love C as much as the next guy. But don''t put C++ down on invalid arguments. Choosing between C and C++ is a preference and a function of impression (what you''re told when you''re starting out). I was told straight up to ditch C and go for C++ (this barely 3 months after starting out), so I hold that view since it worked for me.

[ GDNet Start Here | GDNet FAQ | MS RTFM | STL | Google ]
Thanks to Kylotan for the idea!

Thanks all for your input - this is exactly the type of thing im looking for! :-)

Ive ordered the book as well, MadKeithV. Thanks!

> Anyone who has a true grasp on object oriented programing will never want to go back. But then again anyone who has a tryed and proven methodology in C may never want to spring for C++

This pretty much hits it on the head. Im familiar with C, but am curious about C++. So, im learning C++ - (language is NP, how to think/design in a OOD manner is a bit tougher :-) ), and asking around in various forms to see if people have any info. Book reccomendations are welcomed as well! :-)

You''re all fools!
The Great Computer Language Shootout

We should all be programming in Ocaml, at least according to these weights.

quote:Original post by Stoffel
You''re all fools!
The Great Computer Language Shootout
I love it!

We should all be programming in Ocaml, at least according to these weights.

But since we aren''t, we at least choose the next best thing (C++)! And ocamlb doesn''t count since it doesn''t compile to native code!

[ GDNet Start Here | GDNet FAQ | MS RTFM | STL | Google ]
Thanks to Kylotan for the idea!

" I know you''ve already been directed to another forum, but I''ll jump in and give you an excellent reference on why there is no reason NOT to use C++ in your projects:

Efficient C++ - Performance Programming Techniques. Dov Bulka & David Mayhew, Addison Wesley, ISBN 0-201-37950-3. "

The book came in today, and is _exactly_ what I was looking for.

Thank you very much!