--- In [email protected], Thomas Hruska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snip> > Is _one_ of the worst ideas ever (I never said 'the worst'). > I know what a buffer overflow is. You seem to think there > is a difference between ANSI C and ANSI C++ with regards to > the underlying usage of memory. There isn't. Using a special > character to signify the termination of data has and always > will be a bad idea inherited from the DOS days of yore.
May I dare to be pernickety here? This is not correct; the K&R C notion of strings being terminated by the NUL character originates from the late 1960's when Brian Kernighan, Dennis Ritchie, and Ken Thompson started their work on the first versions of Unix; it's noteably older than MS-DOS which (as of my knowledge) dates back to 1980 or so; even CP/M (the technical predecessor of QDOS, the technical basis of MS-DOS [no, Thomas, this note is NOT directed to you]) is younger than this C notion. > C is outmoded and outdated. All new software programs (and > even existing ones) should be [re]written in C++ even if > classes and templates are not used. However, the specific > class/template features of C++ offer methods of eliminating > the possibility of buffer overflows in the first place. > Something that C simply can't offer. May I dare to disagree here as well? There is one reason why I will keep on coding C instead of C++ when it comes to the software environment of my employer: with C++, you have and will always have trouble with name mangling processes; that means you cannot link a piece of software e.g. compiled with Sun Forte 4.0 with a piece of software compiler with Sun Forte 5.0 because the C++ member functions have different names with respect to C linkage. And believe it or not, but I have had such trouble with C++ compilers a couple of times over the past six years; only two weeks ago I had to refuse an additional short-term project because we couldn't get hold of a suitable C++ compiler in time. <snip> > > I provided helpful information without giving a blatant > > answer or a canned non-helpful response. Stop, stop, stop, pretty please. We can (and should) discuss matters of style openly when it comes to such public advice, but please let us all keep our moods cool; in no way it will help to become so deeply involved into any discussions. We have seen enough flame wars over the past years; please let us stop here before we get into such completely useless debates again. This is not only bad style, it also venoms our hearts and mind to behave like that. Please, let us all return to helpful criticism and a low cool voice. [All native English speakers, please forgive me if I misused "venom" here; I simply don't know whether this word can be used as a verb and not only as a noun.] [And to make this very clear: I do NOT mean "let us talk in a politically correct way"; I utterly dislike this term and its meaning, and as I don't reside in the USA I am in the happy position to not being forced to follow such style of conversation and behaviour; behaving in a "politically correct manner" is in my personal opinion utter nonsense and causes huge damage.] Regards, Nico
