4 ms·
The author definitely does not consider them all rolled into one; the author was a member of the C++ standards committee. That quote is discussing the C-backwar
by _delirium 13y ago
The author definitely does not consider them all rolled into one; the author was a member of the C++ standards committee. That quote is discussing the C-backwards-compatibility baggage of C++ as a design flaw in C++. In the context of C itself, it might not be a design flaw, and the author appears less interested in that question (he's been writing about C++ since the '90s, and doesn't really write about C).
- chetanahuja 13y agoI don't know about you, but I read "which you shouldn’t use it in day-to-day programming" and "all that ugly stuff" to mean a complete and utter dismissal of C as a language even worthy of consideration. Are you somehow getting a message that the author is endorsing going back to the simple days of pure C?
- tesseractive 13y agoYou could believe C is an absolutely fantastic systems-programming language, but believe that in day to day applications programming, it is a poor choice. Actually, I think that belief is fairly common. I don't think it would be going too far in the direction of looking for a charitable interpretation of the author's statements to consider this possibility.
- PeterisP 13y agoI could argue that in C++ applications actually using the C subset should be completely and utterly dismissed, even though it is compatible.