4 ms·

Pointers aren't hard, it's C/C++ that make them complicated. Addresses and indirection in any assembly language are simple and straightforward, easy and even in

by t-3 7mo ago

Pointers aren't hard, it's C/C++ that make them complicated. Addresses and indirection in any assembly language are simple and straightforward, easy and even intuitive once you start actually writing programs.

phist_mcgee 7mo ago
Tell that to the thousands of comp sci students who drop out every year because they don't like programming in C!
- t-3 7mo ago
  I used to think I was incapable of learning "real" programming because I didn't get C. When I later read a book on programming in assembly, I realized that everything that had felt so complex was actually not so difficult. C pointer syntax is weird and doesn't parse naturally for many people, especially programming novices who might not yet have a solid grasp on what/how/why they're doing anything.
- neutronicus 6mo ago
  Right, but it's hard to tell how much confusion is caused by C syntax vs the idea of a memory address. In particular I think people are very confused by declaring pointers and the overloaded meaning of the dereference operator.
account42 6mo ago
C and C++ pointers aren't any harder than pointers in assembly, at least as far as novices complaining about pointers being hard are concerned.
- t-3 6mo ago
  They are though! Indirection in assembly is just something like: ldr dest, [src, offset] It's straightforward and pretty hard to mess up, and easy to read to because the format is consistent. Whereas in C all the following are valid (and it becomes even more confusing with assignment in the declaration statement, tons of footguns and weird syntax): int* a; int *a; int a[]; int a[5]; Assignment is weird too, especially because dereferencing and defining a pointer both use '*'. *a = c; a[0] = c; Then you have structs/unions and their members, and what if those are pointers? You get . and -> syntax. It's weird and complicated, much much more complicated than assembly. That's before you get to casting and types which make C much more complicated than assembly for doing low level stuff.

by t-3 7mo ago

phist_mcgee 7mo ago

Tell that to the thousands of comp sci students who drop out every year because they don't like programming in C!

t-3 7mo ago
I used to think I was incapable of learning "real" programming because I didn't get C. When I later read a book on programming in assembly, I realized that everything that had felt so complex was actually not so difficult. C pointer syntax is weird and doesn't parse naturally for many people, especially programming novices who might not yet have a solid grasp on what/how/why they're doing anything.
neutronicus 6mo ago
Right, but it's hard to tell how much confusion is caused by C syntax vs the idea of a memory address. In particular I think people are very confused by declaring pointers and the overloaded meaning of the dereference operator.

account42 6mo ago

C and C++ pointers aren't any harder than pointers in assembly, at least as far as novices complaining about pointers being hard are concerned.

t-3 6mo ago
They are though! Indirection in assembly is just something like: ldr dest, [src, offset] It's straightforward and pretty hard to mess up, and easy to read to because the format is consistent. Whereas in C all the following are valid (and it becomes even more confusing with assignment in the declaration statement, tons of footguns and weird syntax): int* a; int *a; int a[]; int a[5]; Assignment is weird too, especially because dereferencing and defining a pointer both use '*'. *a = c; a[0] = c; Then you have structs/unions and their members, and what if those are pointers? You get . and -> syntax. It's weird and complicated, much much more complicated than assembly. That's before you get to casting and types which make C much more complicated than assembly for doing low level stuff.