Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C++ > Newbies don't learn C++

Reply
Thread Tools

Newbies don't learn C++

 
 
Paul
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011

"Joshua Maurice" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
On Jan 12, 9:42 am, "Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> The only reference i made to Java was to suggest it is much more portable
> across ALL of the new devices that are the current fashion.
> i.e: mobile phones, since you obviously need an example to explain this.


Depends on your technical definition of portable. While there might be
less porting work when taking java from implementation A to
implementation B, I'm pretty sure that C is supported on much more
hardware than Java.

.................................................. .............


What do you mean by 'supported on hardware'?
I didn't realise hardware was designed to support any specifiic programming
language.

With C you need to learn a whole new API everytime a new device comes into
fashion, not so with Java. I could make a crude mobile phone application,
from scratch, in a few hours with java. If I were to attempt this in C it
would take a week to get compiler and API docs alone.
Additionaly the Java App would work on a ton of different phones, and
require very little tinkering to work on the rest. The C App would work on
one type of phone only.

As they seem to be releasing some new gadget every month it will not be
worth spending the time to learn the API, by the time you create your first
App , someone else will probably have done it and it will be time to learn
something new. The only serious use of C++ will be massive programs such as
video games and lets face it only a very select few programmers will ever
reach the grand level of directX video programmer.

I always supported C++ because I was a speed freak, but with the speed of
processors nowadays is there any real noteable difference in most non speed
critical programs, or network programs that are restricted in speed by the
network anyway. I am now leaning towards Java and there is always ASM for
devices that do not support Java, can always hack a program together in C if
needed.
It seems my idea of C++ are not fitting with the direction C++ seems to be
going anyway. As they seem to be going down the route of more complicated
compilers it will be even more difficult to develop compilers for new
devices.
C++ seems to be trying to expand in all directions at once with no real
direction and as I said elsewhere seems very confused and overly
complicated. Yet at the same time C++ seems to be going back in time to C
with a few bolts ons. The chicken-egg scenario with the standards doesn't
make the picture any prettier.


I used to know what a member function was in C++ but apparently I don't
anymore , and neither does Bjarne Stroustrup

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Paul
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011

"Francis Glassborow" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 12/01/2011 20:45, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>> On 12/01/2011 20:28, Jarrick Chagma wrote:
>>> "Leigh Johnston" wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> Again this is just clueless guff; how is anybody supposed to
>>>> *understand* clueless guff.
>>>
>>> SO WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO FEED THIS NASTY TROLL???
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Jarrick
>>>

>>
>> There is still a small possibility that he is not a troll just somebody
>> who holds incorrect opinions and finds it hard being told that said
>> opinions are incorrect.
>>
>> I am close to adding an ignore filter though but others will reply even
>> if I don't and I am not sure ignoring an entire thread is a good idea as
>> threads often go through a change of subject.
>>
>> /Leigh

>
> Regardless of anything else, someone who uses gay and homosexual as
> insults and hopes that other posters will die in 2011 should be ignored.
> --
> ACCU Conference 2011 The one you cannot afford to miss
>

Ahaaah a gay conference , can't afford to miss that one lads
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDeKKbrGngE

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Dilip
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011
On Jan 12, 3:45*pm, Leigh Johnston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 12/01/2011 20:28, Jarrick Chagma wrote:
>
> > "Leigh Johnston" wrote in message
> >news:(E-Mail Removed)...

>
> > [...]

>
> >> Again this is just clueless guff; how is anybody supposed to
> >> *understand* clueless guff.

>
> > SO WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO FEED THIS NASTY TROLL???

>
> > Regards,

>
> > Jarrick

>
> There is still a small possibility that he is not a troll just somebody
> who holds incorrect opinions and finds it hard being told that said
> opinions are incorrect.


I find this extremely hard to believe. I am a passive observer on
this newsgroup and I have constantly followed your incoherent attacks
on James Kanze. Mr. Kanze, as anyone in this newsgroup will attest,
is extremely well respected in the C++ community. One of those
handful of people who can quote the C++ standard chatper & verse and
has probably attended many committee meetings that you and I can never
spend time doing. Innumerable times you have called him a troll,
accused him of posting bullshit and such.

So you actually are open to the possibility that Paul might not be a
troll (after he pretty much cursed Francis, another expert in the C++
community, to die in 2011) but you are ready to jump on Mr. Kanze's
throat at the slightest sign of disagreement with him?

Please...
 
Reply With Quote
 
Johannes Schaub (litb)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011
Paul wrote:

> I was programming Windows COM Objects 10 years ago , and I'm not
> interested in that anymore.Its old tech.
> It appears to me that "the C++ community" has become very confused, since
> I last visisted the world of C++.
>


Please tell me where you learned to troll that way. I could never even get
10 people to get in rage about something I write!
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dilip
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011
On Jan 13, 7:15*am, Leigh Johnston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 13/01/2011 11:36, Dilip wrote:
> > I find this extremely hard to believe. *I am a passive observer on
> > this newsgroup and I have constantly followed your incoherent attacks
> > on James Kanze. *Mr. Kanze, as anyone in this newsgroup will attest,
> > is extremely well respected in the C++ community. *One of those
> > handful of people who can quote the C++ standard chatper& *verse and
> > has probably attended many committee meetings that you and I can never
> > spend time doing. *Innumerable times you have called him a troll,
> > accused him of posting bullshit and such.

>
> > So you actually are open to the possibility that Paul might not be a
> > troll (after he pretty much cursed Francis, another expert in the C++
> > community, to die in 2011) but you are ready to jump on Mr. Kanze's
> > throat at the slightest sign of disagreement with him?

>
> > Please...

>
> Please? *Mr Kanze does spout bullshit occasionally (not always) and
> refuses to back down which seems like trolling to me. *Stop appealing to
> this mythical "C++ community" authority. *For the record I have also
> called Paul obnoxious in addition to asserting that his rants are bullshit.
>
> /Leigh


We should all be thankful that Mr. Johnston is here to mop up all that
bullshit.

Nevertheless I didn't appeal to the C++ community's authority. I said
he is an expert in my mind. I didn't say experts shouldn't be wrong.
My point is the way you deal with stuff that seems to go against your
world view. If you disagree, please go re-read the thread where there
was a lot of noise about what constitutes a memory leak. At any given
point in time, more than 5 people disagreed with your definition of a
memory leak, yet you stood your ground claiming you are right (by
quoting MSDN of all the places) and the rest of the world is on LSD.

In what way are you different from Paul in this regard?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011

"Dilip" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
On Jan 13, 7:15 am, Leigh Johnston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 13/01/2011 11:36, Dilip wrote:

<snip>
>In what way are you different from Paul in this regard?


Please do not compare me to Leigh.
I am correct 99.9% of the time. Leigh is nothing more thna a babbling idiot.


For proof see the outcome of this thread where Leigh argues with a Bjarne
Stroustrup quote then runs away when confronted with some basic asm.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Dilip
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011
On Jan 13, 9:18*am, Leigh Johnston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 13/01/2011 13:45, Dilip wrote:
>
> > In what way are you different from Paul in this regard?

>
> The difference is Paul is spouting bullshit which is in conflict with
> the C++ standard and we *all* agree he is spouting bullshit.
>
> What I said regarding the definition of a memory leak was not bullshit;
> I gave an example which agreed with my definition (DLL).


That was not the scenario where Mr. Kanze's singleton was supposed to
be used.

> A memory leak is the failure to deallocate that which was allocated
> before program termination, end of story. *


A dynamically allocated singleton object whose lifetime extends until
the application shuts down is leaking memory? You are stretching the
definition of a "leak".

Anyway.. we don't need to restart this all over again.. One thread was
enough.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Fred Zwarts
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011
"Dilip" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)
> On Jan 13, 7:15 am, Leigh Johnston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On 13/01/2011 11:36, Dilip wrote:

>
> ...
>
> In what way are you different from Paul in this regard?


The resemblance of their reactions is indeed surprizing.
Has it occurred to you that it could be one person posting with two names?
Or maybe with a multi-personality problem, so that they really are
communicating with each other using this newsgroup?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dilip
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011
On Jan 13, 9:56*am, Leigh Johnston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 13/01/2011 14:45, Dilip wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 13, 9:18 am, Leigh Johnston<(E-Mail Removed)> *wrote:
> >> On 13/01/2011 13:45, Dilip wrote:

>
> >>> In what way are you different from Paul in this regard?

>
> >> The difference is Paul is spouting bullshit which is in conflict with
> >> the C++ standard and we *all* agree he is spouting bullshit.

>
> >> What I said regarding the definition of a memory leak was not bullshit;
> >> I gave an example which agreed with my definition (DLL).

>
> > That was not the scenario where Mr. Kanze's singleton was supposed to
> > be used.

>
> >> A memory leak is the failure to deallocate that which was allocated
> >> before program termination, end of story.

>
> > A dynamically allocated singleton object whose lifetime extends until
> > the application shuts down is leaking memory? You are stretching the
> > definition of a "leak".

>
> If during program termination the C/C++ runtime or the OS has to cleanup
> a memory allocation due to a lack of a paired deallocation then that
> memory allocation is a leak yes. *You are also forgetting that an object
> can become unreachable and yet not be a leak (delete this).
>
>
>
> > Anyway.. we don't need to restart this all over again.. One thread was
> > enough.

>
> Why reply then?


Because, believe it or not, I find most of your posts terribly
illuminating. You obviously know your stuff. If you could only stay
away from that occasional ad-hominem, I can actually learn a thing or
two everyday.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2011

"Francis Glassborow" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 13/01/2011 14:45, Dilip wrote:
>> On Jan 13, 9:18 am, Leigh Johnston<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> On 13/01/2011 13:45, Dilip wrote:
>>>
>>>> In what way are you different from Paul in this regard?
>>>
>>> The difference is Paul is spouting bullshit which is in conflict with
>>> the C++ standard and we *all* agree he is spouting bullshit.
>>>
>>> What I said regarding the definition of a memory leak was not bullshit;
>>> I gave an example which agreed with my definition (DLL).

>>
>> That was not the scenario where Mr. Kanze's singleton was supposed to
>> be used.
>>
>>> A memory leak is the failure to deallocate that which was allocated
>>> before program termination, end of story.


It's beyond the realms of your imagination to discuss the technicalities of
a multi process program. Therefore I suggest you only consider a memory leak
within the constraints of a single process PE.
With that, it is correct to say that a memory leak is when you "lose" the
pointer to a block of memory.

A memory leak is not a failure to deallocate on program termination. This is
something a beginner is encouraged to do as an excercise of good practise.

>>
>> A dynamically allocated singleton object whose lifetime extends until
>> the application shuts down is leaking memory? You are stretching the
>> definition of a "leak".

>
> In which case the Standard C++ Library leaks because std::cout etc. are
> not normally destroyed these days. I was surprised when I discovered this
> because it used not to be the case. The argument is simply that letting
> the OS recover the storage at program termination is OK and it avoids
> problems when dtors of other static objects use them.
>
>

Again multi-process apps are beyond the imagination of most users here.
In the case of a single process PE its not quite a case of "letting" the OS
recover memory . The OS *will* recover the memory.
I will leave you dudes to argue about whether this is OK or not.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some information for the one who decided to learn C++, and now wantsto learn at least a bit of C? Alexander C Programming 20 09-11-2010 01:04 AM
How we recognize newbies as newbies Alf P. Steinbach C++ 31 08-21-2007 05:12 PM
Learn the language before you learn the GUI. CoreyWhite C++ 1 03-31-2007 08:56 PM
Re: Newbies? - Usenet don't need no steenking newbies! =?iso-8859-1?Q?=B1?= Digital Photography 2 07-17-2004 02:26 PM
newbie question: should I learn TKinter or skip it and learn more advanced toolkit? Porky Pig Jr Python 3 05-12-2004 08:58 AM



Advertisments