Originally Posted by Rallybozan

Isn't it best to learn c++ instead of just c, directly? I don't really understand the benefits learning C first, and then C++?

If your goal is to learn C++ then there is no real need to learn C first. Actually it might be detrimental to learn C first since there are certain practices you would have to unlearn.

This article mentions a couple of reasons why someone might choose to learn C instead of C++:

http://unthought.net/c++/c_vs_c++.html

This book i'm reading (it's sixth edition, that is) was released in 2008

So far, this one unexplained and mystifying aspect (this matter of referencing files from a b: drive) has been the only downside of the book thus far. Other than that, it's been 100% clear.

---

C can be utilized effectively by most C++ compilers (though not always guaranteed to work). Which makes learning C, "not a waste"

However, as Nullpointer mentioned: you will have to unlearn some habits when shifting from C to C++, as i'm sure you would from any language paradigm to another.


If we were to discuss the benefit of developing certain programs in C++, as compared to LISP (or any other variety of languages)... the real question we ought to ask is, "which is the better tool for this particular project?"

That is: which one is going to allow us to pump out 100,000 lines of code in 2 hours, as opposed to 20 days? (companies are concerned with production more than they're concerned with letting techies utilize corporate budgets to make geek-like/further developments) that is, unless you work for Facebook, Google or Microsoft.


And, if we're to talk about the "value" of learning one language over another: we could simply say that no language is intrinsically "better" than another, although others may be more well-equipped. But that there are some applications programmed in certain languages as opposed to others, and anyone who has done their research before setting out to accomplish a task will have looked into the benefits of each (usually: cost-analysis, portability, development-time/product-deployment-time, etc.)


As per regards what language(s) you "should" study: I recommend taking a look at the applications/programs/scripts that fascinate you first. Then, if you become enamoured with the idea of building them yourself one day, learn that language as opposed to another.

For while many say PHP is an easy language as compared to others, and I don't doubt this (while simultaneously having MUCH respect myself for it's scope and it's complexities) found it extremely HARD to get through, as compared to C

why is this? could it be that I wasn't genuinely interested in learning how to make the things that could be made with PHP? This was totally the case.


I will not insult PHP by comparing it to LEGOs, however, the comparison (I personally feel) does apply.

That is, of course, unless you are A Deveoloper as opposed to a "code monkey"


The Developer is interested in creating things that haven't been thought of before. The code monkey has done a lot of developing him/herself, but has gotten to such a point that an entire portfolio of code is available for him/her to cut and paste, ad infinitum.

This disturbs and upsets me. In fact, it disturbs and upsets me so much that I left PHP and walked into the light of C (yes, ******nit, The Light of C)

why? because it's archaic, dangerous, and powerful. because so many have turned their heads away from it. have abandoned it (though not really) like a stepchild with red-hair in light of what Mendel (the botanist) would call inferior/weak genes.

I'm not attempting to revive, resurrect, or incite a call for Pürity among programming languages... but I was finding that PHP was leaving me clueless about programming (in general), and how nice it has been to take an introspective look at The Ancestor Language, The Place Where It All Started and gather for myself the artifacts of Programming that measure in wealth, quality and substance as The Spear of Longinus is to The Holy Graal in terms of: DESTINY


forgive me fellow students of programming, for I have sinned. I know not what I do... (having abandoned PHP for C/C++), but i'm sure- like Jesus- that if I refuse to pass the cup of my suffering, I will go to Programmer Heaven and when I get there I will be met by 2Pac, Marvin Gaye, FORTRAN, my copy of Windows 98, Skeeter Davis, and the AMSTRAD CPC 464


That is right ladies and gentlemen, I have abandoned PHP in favour of C. Have chosen to jump right into C, as opposed to C++ (while having plans to jump into C++, after finishing this current textbook)

Am I setting myself up for failure? Have I taken a few steps backwards?

Only time will tell, and I can't wait to come back to this post in a year to see how much I didn't know versus how much i'll know when another year comes around.

I will attack my past-self and make fun of him for being stupid, i'll call him a n00b, steal his lunch and throw him into a locker. My future-self will be so much cooler, he will wear leather jackets and fur hats; sport a chalice full of crunk juice and gold teeth. He will study C++ fanatically and look at the old C textbook with forlorn and disdain.

...maybe?

Originally Posted by NullPointer

http://unthought.net/c++/c_vs_c++.html

while I appreciate having taken the 1.5 hour it took to read that page, I have to ask myself: How concerned with code-optimization is a company bent on pumping out it's next product by enter due date here?

So far, this one unexplained and mystifying aspect (this matter of referencing files from a b: drive) has been the only downside of the book thus far. Other than that, it's been 100% clear.

It was probably written back in the mists of time when only the finest computers had the luxury of such extravagent extras as a "hard drive" (5Mb usually, 10Mb if you were flashy and rich!!)

Most of us had to do with the OS 5-1/4 floppy disc in 'A' and saving the work to drive B: assuming you were fortunate enough to have a machine with twin floppies that is!

I don't miss the days when computers sounded like vacuum cleaners

"which one is going to allow us to pump out 100,000 lines of code in 2 hours" Start learning COBOL

PaulW,

I guess I should've mentioned that having to create 100,000 lines of code versus 30 in order to accomplish the same task (as if this were a great thing!), was perhaps not the best choice of words.