Re: C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- From: Sebastian 'lunar' Wiesner <basti.wiesner@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:21:52 +0100
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@xxxxxxxxx> typed
On a sunny day (Thu, 28 Dec 2006 16:31:26 -0600) it happened Beowulf
<beowulf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<pan.2006.12.28.22.31.26.629544@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
C or C++, which is better to learn and improve upon for a goal of
contributing to open source projects, writing linux drivers, helping
with linux and FOSS in general?
C.
C++ is not a language but speech disability.
You seem to have a serious thinking disability, if you meant this
statement serious...
Stroussup could not really program, that became clear to me after
reading his book. It needs too much text, to many :: and overloading
sucks and is for dummies.
no comment...
Of course MS uses it, that is why MS is so bloated.
The reason, why MS C++ applications are bloated, is not C++ itself. MS
simply never understood, how to design libraries. Therefore the MFC
library is nearly unusable. However, C++ in combination with the VCL
library from Borland or the QT Toolkit is a very elegant and fast
language, even on the "bloated" windows system.
The Windows API is even worse than MFC, although it has been written in
your favourite language C.
--
Freedom is always the freedom of dissenters.
(Rosa Luxemburg)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- From: Grant Edwards
- Re: C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- References:
- C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- From: Beowulf
- Re: C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- From: Jan Panteltje
- C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- Prev by Date: Re: C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- Next by Date: Re: C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- Previous by thread: Re: C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- Next by thread: Re: C or C++ for FOSS/linux?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|