3 ms·
It's correct to say that C is a more explicit programming language than C++, where each line of code won't have large side-effects in performance or code size.
by blub 10y ago
It's correct to say that C is a more explicit programming language than C++, where each line of code won't have large side-effects in performance or code size.
The consequence is having to painstakingly code everything at a low level of detail though, with only macros and its limited functions to rely on for code reuse.
This would be fine for low-level embedded work, but anything other than that is simply painful, unproductive and in my opinion not fun at all. I shudder at the thought of having to manually free resources, to use the embarrassing C strings and arrays or having to write dozens or hundreds of line of code to do one simple thing that C++ can do more safely and also in a highly-reusable way.
C is inadequate and has been for a long time. Its status of mythical, hardcore programming language continues to protect it, but slowly people are becoming more outraged at its inadequacies, as they should be. That's what the fuss is about.
- Roboprog 10y agoIndeed. It's certainly possible to make a language with safety checks that could be turned off in the final version which then has the same performance, but has built in help during development, as well as less cryptic notation. As stated elsewhere, Pascal/Modula (for example) has some very nice features and is written at about the same level. As for small devices in this day and age, it's not like we can't use cross compilers hosted on desktop computers, since that what phone/tablet systems already do.