Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C++ > Why is C++ so popular

Reply
Thread Tools

Why is C++ so popular

 
 
ralph
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-02-2012
On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 12:33:24 -0500, Lynn McGuire <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>On 9/29/2012 11:54 PM, Jan G wrote:
>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> On 9/27/2012 4:38 AM, BGB wrote:
>>>> On 9/27/2012 3:44 AM, Brian wrote:
>>>>> I have not found an answer to the question why C++ is the most
>>>>> preferred language. I thought it would be a good question to ask in
>>>>> this newsgroup that has programmers that have been using C++ for a
>>>>> while. I did read that its popular because it can be transferred to
>>>>> other
>>>>> platforms but not everyone has more than one platform.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> because it sucks less than the other options?...
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Lynn

>>
>> Lynn, that you are a newbie to the spiel and that there should not be
>> anymore newbies, is quite disconcerting.

>
>I have been writing software for about 40 years
>now and have used about 10 software languages.
>All software languages suck but C++ sucks less
>really describes my feelings well.
>
>Don't even get me started on user interface APIs.
>


LOL

My sentiments exactly.

I started writing C in 1977 ("before they wrote the book" was my brag.
<g>). As an early adopter of OO, cfront shortly after. Languages I
have dabbled with have come and gone, yet c\c++ remains.

Whenever a particular platform, language, script, API came up short -
out came a trusty C++ compiler. I firmly believe there is no
programming problem that can't be resolved with another layer of
indirection.

When asked why C++ is popular, useful, "better", "advisable" ... I
often tried to provide glorious prose and profound 'proofs'. I owe BGB
a debt - from now on I can simply say "It sucks less". <g>

-ralph
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jorgen Grahn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-02-2012
On Mon, 2012-10-01, BGB wrote:
> On 9/30/2012 5:31 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>> On Sat, 2012-09-29, Rui Maciel wrote:
>>> Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unix C programmers, yes. There's some kind of sibling rivalry
>>>> going on. And some semi-rational reasons too: we've all seen
>>>> atrocious C++ code.
>>>
>>> Seeing atrocious code is no excuse to hate the language. If you showed them
>>> atrocious C code, I bet they wouldn't think differently of C.

>>
>> Well, I *did* say "semi" ...
>>
>> If you're a C programmer you can see unmaintainable code, accept that
>> it's a mess ... but at the same time you *know* the language features
>> it uses are necessary.
>>
>> With C++ you know the language features *aren't* necessary. You don't
>> see (since you're a C programmer with no real C++ experience) how very
>> useful they are when used properly.

>
> OTOH, a person can see and know how useful the features can be, but due
> to other reasons, may still instead opt with C (as, after all, the
> features aren't strictly necessary).


Of course, but that's a different thing. My comments above was about
people who (a) don't use C++ and still (b) complain loudly every time
it's mentioned. Not about rational reasons why people use C.

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
BGB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-02-2012
On 10/2/2012 3:24 PM, ralph wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 12:33:24 -0500, Lynn McGuire <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>> On 9/29/2012 11:54 PM, Jan G wrote:
>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> On 9/27/2012 4:38 AM, BGB wrote:
>>>>> On 9/27/2012 3:44 AM, Brian wrote:
>>>>>> I have not found an answer to the question why C++ is the most
>>>>>> preferred language. I thought it would be a good question to ask in
>>>>>> this newsgroup that has programmers that have been using C++ for a
>>>>>> while. I did read that its popular because it can be transferred to
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> platforms but not everyone has more than one platform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> because it sucks less than the other options?...
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Lynn
>>>
>>> Lynn, that you are a newbie to the spiel and that there should not be
>>> anymore newbies, is quite disconcerting.

>>
>> I have been writing software for about 40 years
>> now and have used about 10 software languages.
>> All software languages suck but C++ sucks less
>> really describes my feelings well.
>>
>> Don't even get me started on user interface APIs.
>>

>
> LOL
>
> My sentiments exactly.
>
> I started writing C in 1977 ("before they wrote the book" was my brag.
> <g>). As an early adopter of OO, cfront shortly after. Languages I
> have dabbled with have come and gone, yet c\c++ remains.
>


admittedly, I haven't been around nearly so long...
(at that time, I didn't exist yet).

around 20 years later (mid/late 90s), I was in elementary and middle
school and mostly still learning the basics of programming (a lot of
this by hacking around on/around the Quake source and similar...).

I got mostly into interpreters during high-school, back in the early
2000s. this was partly due to curiosity, and partly because at one point
I tried using and then got frustrated with GNU Guile.


> Whenever a particular platform, language, script, API came up short -
> out came a trusty C++ compiler. I firmly believe there is no
> programming problem that can't be resolved with another layer of
> indirection.
>
> When asked why C++ is popular, useful, "better", "advisable" ... I
> often tried to provide glorious prose and profound 'proofs'. I owe BGB
> a debt - from now on I can simply say "It sucks less". <g>
>


yeah.

this has mostly been my experience.


there are a few areas where C and C++ come out a little weaker (vs a
scripting language or similar), but the scripting language I use for
these cases would fall on its face if it tried to do what C and C++ are
typically used for doing (a scripting language would make a poor choice
for an implementation language).


 
Reply With Quote
 
Brian
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-03-2012
BGB <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 10/2/2012 3:24 PM, ralph wrote:
>> On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 12:33:24 -0500, Lynn McGuire <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/29/2012 11:54 PM, Jan G wrote:
>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>> On 9/27/2012 4:38 AM, BGB wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/27/2012 3:44 AM, Brian wrote:
>>>>>>> I have not found an answer to the question why C++ is the most
>>>>>>> preferred language. I thought it would be a good question to ask in
>>>>>>> this newsgroup that has programmers that have been using C++ for a
>>>>>>> while. I did read that its popular because it can be transferred to
>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>> platforms but not everyone has more than one platform.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> because it sucks less than the other options?...
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> Lynn
>>>>
>>>> Lynn, that you are a newbie to the spiel and that there should not be
>>>> anymore newbies, is quite disconcerting.
>>>
>>> I have been writing software for about 40 years
>>> now and have used about 10 software languages.
>>> All software languages suck but C++ sucks less
>>> really describes my feelings well.
>>>
>>> Don't even get me started on user interface APIs.
>>>

>>
>> LOL
>>
>> My sentiments exactly.
>>
>> I started writing C in 1977 ("before they wrote the book" was my brag.
>> <g>). As an early adopter of OO, cfront shortly after. Languages I
>> have dabbled with have come and gone, yet c\c++ remains.
>>

>
> admittedly, I haven't been around nearly so long...
> (at that time, I didn't exist yet).
>
> around 20 years later (mid/late 90s), I was in elementary and middle
> school and mostly still learning the basics of programming (a lot of this
> by hacking around on/around the Quake source and similar...).
>
> I got mostly into interpreters during high-school, back in the early
> 2000s. this was partly due to curiosity, and partly because at one point
> I tried using and then got frustrated with GNU Guile.
>
>
>> Whenever a particular platform, language, script, API came up short -
>> out came a trusty C++ compiler. I firmly believe there is no
>> programming problem that can't be resolved with another layer of
>> indirection.
>>
>> When asked why C++ is popular, useful, "better", "advisable" ... I
>> often tried to provide glorious prose and profound 'proofs'. I owe BGB
>> a debt - from now on I can simply say "It sucks less". <g>
>>

>
> yeah.
>
> this has mostly been my experience.
>
>
> there are a few areas where C and C++ come out a little weaker (vs a
> scripting language or similar), but the scripting language I use for
> these cases would fall on its face if it tried to do what C and C++ are
> typically used for doing (a scripting language would make a poor choice
> for an implementation language).


And C++ is got to be better than programming in assembly language.
I started programming when I brought a TRS 80 computer 30 years ago. When
you switched it on you got a BASIC language editor so the first language I
learnt was BASIC.
To find out how programs worked I took them apart using a disassembler and
stepped through the raw machine language code. I wasn't a hacker like some
people that added a jump statement to by pass the programs protection but
just liked to find out how commercial programs such as games worked.

--
Regards Brian
 
Reply With Quote
 
BGB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-03-2012
On 10/2/2012 7:50 PM, Brian wrote:
> BGB <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On 10/2/2012 3:24 PM, ralph wrote:
>>> On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 12:33:24 -0500, Lynn McGuire <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/29/2012 11:54 PM, Jan G wrote:
>>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/27/2012 4:38 AM, BGB wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9/27/2012 3:44 AM, Brian wrote:
>>>>>>>> I have not found an answer to the question why C++ is the most
>>>>>>>> preferred language. I thought it would be a good question to ask in
>>>>>>>> this newsgroup that has programmers that have been using C++ for a
>>>>>>>> while. I did read that its popular because it can be transferred to
>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>> platforms but not everyone has more than one platform.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> because it sucks less than the other options?...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lynn
>>>>>
>>>>> Lynn, that you are a newbie to the spiel and that there should not be
>>>>> anymore newbies, is quite disconcerting.
>>>>
>>>> I have been writing software for about 40 years
>>>> now and have used about 10 software languages.
>>>> All software languages suck but C++ sucks less
>>>> really describes my feelings well.
>>>>
>>>> Don't even get me started on user interface APIs.
>>>>
>>>
>>> LOL
>>>
>>> My sentiments exactly.
>>>
>>> I started writing C in 1977 ("before they wrote the book" was my brag.
>>> <g>). As an early adopter of OO, cfront shortly after. Languages I
>>> have dabbled with have come and gone, yet c\c++ remains.
>>>

>>
>> admittedly, I haven't been around nearly so long...
>> (at that time, I didn't exist yet).
>>
>> around 20 years later (mid/late 90s), I was in elementary and middle
>> school and mostly still learning the basics of programming (a lot of this
>> by hacking around on/around the Quake source and similar...).
>>
>> I got mostly into interpreters during high-school, back in the early
>> 2000s. this was partly due to curiosity, and partly because at one point
>> I tried using and then got frustrated with GNU Guile.
>>
>>
>>> Whenever a particular platform, language, script, API came up short -
>>> out came a trusty C++ compiler. I firmly believe there is no
>>> programming problem that can't be resolved with another layer of
>>> indirection.
>>>
>>> When asked why C++ is popular, useful, "better", "advisable" ... I
>>> often tried to provide glorious prose and profound 'proofs'. I owe BGB
>>> a debt - from now on I can simply say "It sucks less". <g>
>>>

>>
>> yeah.
>>
>> this has mostly been my experience.
>>
>>
>> there are a few areas where C and C++ come out a little weaker (vs a
>> scripting language or similar), but the scripting language I use for
>> these cases would fall on its face if it tried to do what C and C++ are
>> typically used for doing (a scripting language would make a poor choice
>> for an implementation language).

>
> And C++ is got to be better than programming in assembly language.
> I started programming when I brought a TRS 80 computer 30 years ago. When
> you switched it on you got a BASIC language editor so the first language I
> learnt was BASIC.
> To find out how programs worked I took them apart using a disassembler and
> stepped through the raw machine language code. I wasn't a hacker like some
> people that added a jump statement to by pass the programs protection but
> just liked to find out how commercial programs such as games worked.
>
>


early on, when I started messing with computers (elementary school
years), my dad had a 486, and I used it mostly to play Wolfenstein 3D
and Doom. Quake ran, but slowly, on a 486DX2.

back in these days, the internet was also really slow, and most games
ran in DOS (so it was common to need to boot into DOS mode), ...


I don't really have many clear memories from much before this point
(back this far, memories are a bit fragmentary). I generally classify
these as my early years.

this is, as opposed to now, where I am facing against advancing age and
similar (my 20s will soon be gone... this is worrying...), and also not
having a job.

I have noted occasionally that code of mine from closer to my early
years generally sucked (like, some of my code from around 2004 or so was
pretty horrid).



now, as for C++ vs ASM:

well, C++ offers a few clear advantages at least over ASM:
can get a lot more done in fewer statements;
is portable to a wide variety of systems (vs assembly which has to be
largely rewritten for each type of CPU, OS, ...), and where it isn't
usually possible to move code between one assembler and another (MASM,
NASM, GAS, ... are incompatible), ...

though, there are still a few edge-case things which can only really be
done (effectively, or at all) in ASM.

this results in programs where typically the vast majority is written in
C or C++, but some small parts will exist which are written in ASM
(which may have little or nothing to do with performance).


 
Reply With Quote
 
BGB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-03-2012
On 10/2/2012 3:56 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-10-01, BGB wrote:
>> On 9/30/2012 5:31 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2012-09-29, Rui Maciel wrote:
>>>> Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Unix C programmers, yes. There's some kind of sibling rivalry
>>>>> going on. And some semi-rational reasons too: we've all seen
>>>>> atrocious C++ code.
>>>>
>>>> Seeing atrocious code is no excuse to hate the language. If you showed them
>>>> atrocious C code, I bet they wouldn't think differently of C.
>>>
>>> Well, I *did* say "semi" ...
>>>
>>> If you're a C programmer you can see unmaintainable code, accept that
>>> it's a mess ... but at the same time you *know* the language features
>>> it uses are necessary.
>>>
>>> With C++ you know the language features *aren't* necessary. You don't
>>> see (since you're a C programmer with no real C++ experience) how very
>>> useful they are when used properly.

>>
>> OTOH, a person can see and know how useful the features can be, but due
>> to other reasons, may still instead opt with C (as, after all, the
>> features aren't strictly necessary).

>
> Of course, but that's a different thing. My comments above was about
> people who (a) don't use C++ and still (b) complain loudly every time
> it's mentioned. Not about rational reasons why people use C.
>


yes, granted.

there are people who speak out loudly the other way as well, claiming
that people being around and still writing code in C is "archaic and
stupid", ...



meanwhile, I felt curious, and tried compiling the same code (a small C
program) as either C or C++ mode (and timing it), and am only really
seeing about a 30% difference ratio (C++ mode takes about 30% longer).

this is with GCC / G++, can't really test with MSVC as 'time' isn't working.

I get a larger additional slowdown if I add an "#include <iostream>" in
there (53%), but this can't be reflected in the C mode.

adding "#include <windows.h>" doesn't make a huge difference (compile
times are larger, but the ratio is unchanged).

enabling debug or profile makes the compile times longer, but reduces
the difference (~ 20% difference).

including a large project header reduces the ratio to 16% (and 8% with
debug options). (in both seconds, compiling the file takes around 2
seconds).


I guess this shows that at least C-like C++ code does not compile
significantly slower than plain C code.

(admittedly, I suspected it would be more drastic...).

 
Reply With Quote
 
Rui Maciel
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-03-2012
Jorgen Grahn wrote:

> Well, I *did* say "semi" ...
>
> If you're a C programmer you can see unmaintainable code, accept that
> it's a mess ... but at the same time you *know* the language features
> it uses are necessary.
>
> With C++ you know the language features *aren't* necessary. You don't
> see (since you're a C programmer with no real C++ experience) how very
> useful they are when used properly.


Usefulness is subjective. Programmer A may write code for a project without
using a single function pointer, but that wouldn't mean that function
pointers weren't necessary.

The same applies to, essentially, any feature provided by C++. There might
be cases where a decision has been made to avoid using specific features,
but that doesn't mean that they aren't useful in other cases.


Rui Maciel
 
Reply With Quote
 
Calum
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2012
On Thursday, 27 September 2012 09:44:23 UTC+1, Brian wrote:
> I have not found an answer to the question why C++ is the most preferred
> language. I thought it would be a good question to ask in this newsgroup
> that has programmers that have been using C++ for a while.
> I did read that its popular because it can be transferred to other
> platforms but not everyone has more than one platform.


In my opinion a number of events conspired to make it popular:

1. Backwards compatibility with C, which was and still is an extremely important language.
2. Historically very good performance, compared to alternatives at the time, with smaller runtime requirements
3. Multi-paradigm (not simply OO).
4. Cross platform, cross vendor.
5. Network effects - one popular, it becomes harder to displace.
6. Standardization
7. Manual memory management, giving better control at the expense of a little safety

I think we can all agree that C++ has its warts, and you may want to change parts if you could start from scratch, but that is not the world we live in.

Calum
 
Reply With Quote
 
Brian
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2012
Calum <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Thursday, 27 September 2012 09:44:23 UTC+1, Brian wrote:
>> I have not found an answer to the question why C++ is the most preferred
>> language. I thought it would be a good question to ask in this newsgroup
>> that has programmers that have been using C++ for a while.
>> I did read that its popular because it can be transferred to other
>> platforms but not everyone has more than one platform.

>
> In my opinion a number of events conspired to make it popular:
>
> 1. Backwards compatibility with C, which was and still is an extremely important language.
> 2. Historically very good performance, compared to alternatives at the
> time, with smaller runtime requirements
> 3. Multi-paradigm (not simply OO).
> 4. Cross platform, cross vendor.
> 5. Network effects - one popular, it becomes harder to displace.
> 6. Standardization
> 7. Manual memory management, giving better control at the expense of a little safety
>
> I think we can all agree that C++ has its warts, and you may want to
> change parts if you could start from scratch, but that is not the world we live in.
>
> Calum


Thanks Calum for the 7 good reasons.
I suspect when I get to know C++ better the reasons you listed will become
more clear to me.

--
Regards Brian
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lynn McGuire
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2012
On 10/2/2012 10:30 PM, BGB wrote:
> On 10/2/2012 7:50 PM, Brian wrote:
>> BGB <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> On 10/2/2012 3:24 PM, ralph wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 12:33:24 -0500, Lynn McGuire <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/29/2012 11:54 PM, Jan G wrote:
>>>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9/27/2012 4:38 AM, BGB wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 9/27/2012 3:44 AM, Brian wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I have not found an answer to the question why C++ is the most
>>>>>>>>> preferred language. I thought it would be a good question to ask in
>>>>>>>>> this newsgroup that has programmers that have been using C++ for a
>>>>>>>>> while. I did read that its popular because it can be transferred to
>>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>> platforms but not everyone has more than one platform.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> because it sucks less than the other options?...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lynn
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lynn, that you are a newbie to the spiel and that there should not be
>>>>>> anymore newbies, is quite disconcerting.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have been writing software for about 40 years
>>>>> now and have used about 10 software languages.
>>>>> All software languages suck but C++ sucks less
>>>>> really describes my feelings well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't even get me started on user interface APIs.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL
>>>>
>>>> My sentiments exactly.
>>>>
>>>> I started writing C in 1977 ("before they wrote the book" was my brag.
>>>> <g>). As an early adopter of OO, cfront shortly after. Languages I
>>>> have dabbled with have come and gone, yet c\c++ remains.
>>>>
>>>
>>> admittedly, I haven't been around nearly so long...
>>> (at that time, I didn't exist yet).
>>>
>>> around 20 years later (mid/late 90s), I was in elementary and middle
>>> school and mostly still learning the basics of programming (a lot of this
>>> by hacking around on/around the Quake source and similar...).
>>>
>>> I got mostly into interpreters during high-school, back in the early
>>> 2000s. this was partly due to curiosity, and partly because at one point
>>> I tried using and then got frustrated with GNU Guile.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Whenever a particular platform, language, script, API came up short -
>>>> out came a trusty C++ compiler. I firmly believe there is no
>>>> programming problem that can't be resolved with another layer of
>>>> indirection.
>>>>
>>>> When asked why C++ is popular, useful, "better", "advisable" ... I
>>>> often tried to provide glorious prose and profound 'proofs'. I owe BGB
>>>> a debt - from now on I can simply say "It sucks less". <g>
>>>>
>>>
>>> yeah.
>>>
>>> this has mostly been my experience.
>>>
>>>
>>> there are a few areas where C and C++ come out a little weaker (vs a
>>> scripting language or similar), but the scripting language I use for
>>> these cases would fall on its face if it tried to do what C and C++ are
>>> typically used for doing (a scripting language would make a poor choice
>>> for an implementation language).

>>
>> And C++ is got to be better than programming in assembly language.
>> I started programming when I brought a TRS 80 computer 30 years ago. When
>> you switched it on you got a BASIC language editor so the first language I
>> learnt was BASIC.
>> To find out how programs worked I took them apart using a disassembler and
>> stepped through the raw machine language code. I wasn't a hacker like some
>> people that added a jump statement to by pass the programs protection but
>> just liked to find out how commercial programs such as games worked.
>>
>>

>
> early on, when I started messing with computers (elementary school years), my dad had a 486, and I used it mostly to play Wolfenstein
> 3D and Doom. Quake ran, but slowly, on a 486DX2.
>
> back in these days, the internet was also really slow, and most games ran in DOS (so it was common to need to boot into DOS mode), ...
>
>
> I don't really have many clear memories from much before this point (back this far, memories are a bit fragmentary). I generally
> classify these as my early years.
>
> this is, as opposed to now, where I am facing against advancing age and similar (my 20s will soon be gone... this is worrying...),
> and also not having a job.
>
> I have noted occasionally that code of mine from closer to my early years generally sucked (like, some of my code from around 2004 or
> so was pretty horrid).
>
>
>
> now, as for C++ vs ASM:
>
> well, C++ offers a few clear advantages at least over ASM:
> can get a lot more done in fewer statements;
> is portable to a wide variety of systems (vs assembly which has to be largely rewritten for each type of CPU, OS, ...), and where it
> isn't usually possible to move code between one assembler and another (MASM, NASM, GAS, ... are incompatible), ...
>
> though, there are still a few edge-case things which can only really be done (effectively, or at all) in ASM.
>
> this results in programs where typically the vast majority is written in C or C++, but some small parts will exist which are written
> in ASM (which may have little or nothing to do with performance).


I would not write anything in ASM nowadays. You
never know when you are going to port to another
platform.

Plus the number of ASM compilers on the pc platform
is simply amazing.

Lynn


 
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
why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 4 12-21-2006 01:15 PM
findcontrol("PlaceHolderPrice") why why why why why why why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 2 12-02-2006 03:46 PM
Why is OO popular? Ian Roberts C++ 5 04-20-2004 05:30 AM
Are Dvd-R more popular then the +? Why? lbbs DVD Video 29 01-11-2004 02:14 PM
Are Dvd-R more popular then the +? Why? lbbs Computer Support 9 01-08-2004 12:24 AM



Advertisments