On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:54 am, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
> Wow, that's a fairly complete list. Agree completely on the C/C++
> application/philosophical differences. The book list missed one very
> useful C++ book by Josutis, "The C++ Standard" I think. Don't have it
I agree with all said so far but would add that IMHO, you can't really can't
go past o'reilly for pretty much any topic on computing... to paraphrase,
there are plenty of bad computer books but I would guess few of them are
O'reilly books :-) except maybe UML in a nutshell *shudder*
> You know, everyone's been telling me to give up C and just start
> working with C++. I've been resisting pretty strongly, and now I
> realize why. C is a geeks language. It gives you more control than
> C++. I like C for one primary reason: I like to be in control. I
> know that many of the C++ constructs, member functions, etc. are slow
> in comparison to home grown vanilla construct in C that only do what
> they are needed for. The standard template classes use table lookups
> just to figure out what its contents look like. If you create the
> construct from scratch, it knows whether it's holding an int, char*,
> or struct.
Like someone said, it depends what you want to do.
IMHO, C is much better for small, embedded or system level programming and C++
of large 'enterprise" level programming. It is no wonder that C is the basis
for most OSOSs...
and because someone mentioned Java, I thought i'd mention Forth... :-)
Dr Paul van den Bergen
Centre for Advanced Internet Architectures
"And some run up hill and down dale, knapping the chucky stones
to pieces wi' hammers, like so many road makers run daft.
They say it is to see how the world was made."
Sir Walter Scott, St. Ronan's Well 1824
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"