Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/12/20/01:45:55
On Wed, 17 Dec 1997 05:30:35 -0800, "Clayton Long" <clong AT stetson DOT edu>
wrote:
>
>John M. Aldrich wrote in message <3496C249 DOT 263D AT cs DOT com>...
>>~liquid~ wrote:
>>>
>>> I thought that the object oriented nature of C++ would give it a leg up
>on the older version?
>>> I haven't learned C yet but I've read a book on C++ and it emphisized the
>introduction of new
>>> statements allowing for more "bug free" programming by constraining it to
>limit the uses.
>>> a prime example is the "goto" statement.. From what I've read it should
>be avoided as much as possible
>>
>>Few self-respecting C programmers will use 'goto'. :-) I think the
>>ultimate answer to this question lies not in the language itself, but in
>>the programmer's use of the language. It's just as easy to write
>>mangled C++ code as it is to write mangled C code, and it is
>>mathematically provable that anything written in C++ can be rewritten to
>>function identically in C.
>>
>>Try both, see what you like the best, and work from there.
>
>
>C++ is much better. In C you do not have the option of using classes, so
>you can not encapsulate things like records(to use a PASCAL term) with
>instructions. It is much more versitile and much less confusing to someone
>trying to read it... plus if you are programming for anyone but yourself, it
>is much easier.
>Besides, almost everything is object oriented now... just look at Delphi.
>
You could just use both like i am doing in my game. I am using
mostly C and Allegro, with C++ for file routines :)
Mike.
Lightning Bolt Software:
-----------------------------------------------
A new bolt of shareware EXCITEMENT!!!!
Check us out at:
-----------------------------------------
| www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/3944 |
-----------------------------------------
- Raw text -