Re: C needs a BOOST

James Kuyper Jr. wrote:
jacob navia wrote:
James Kuyper Jr. wrote:
[snip convoluted discussion]

Please, this is off topic for the discussion about C. It is precisely
the type of discussions I would like to avoid when programming in C.

You're proposing extensions to C that resembles a subset of C++ functionality; comparisons with C++ are inevitable. If, as Paul believes, there are awful things wrong with C++ standard containers, then it is important to avoid repeating those mistakes when extending C, and entirely on-topic to discuss what those mistakes were.


OK. You are right in this respect.

If we avoid constructors/destructors entirely we would avoid this
also.

The existence of disagreement between two C++ wizards is already a reason to mark this feature as so complicated that not even
specialists will agree what is going on behind the scene. To avoid
for C imperatively.

I'm not a C++ wizard. I've never written a C++ program for pay, and have only written a few toy C++ programs for myself. I've never taken a class in C++. I'm own a copy of the 1998 C++ standard, and am very familiar with it due to my participation in the comp.std.c++ newsgroup, but have not kept up with the extensive revisions they've made recently for the next version of the standard. I'd like to do some C++ programming professionally, but it seems not to be the language of choice in my chosen specialty, scientific computer programming. Fortran(!?) and C still seem to be the preferred languages in the places where I've looked.

I also doubt that Paul Hsieh is a C++ wizard, if he's that unfamiliar with Allocator classes.

In ANY case both of you are more knowledgable than me, that's why you
look "wizard" for me :-)

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: C (functional programming) VS C++ (object oriented programming)
    ... I'm the only guy thinking that C is a great programming language and that there is no need to program things object oriented. ... Many people says also that they save more time by programming projects object oriented, but I think its faster to program them in a good structured functional way. ... accept the C99 standard fully, ... jacob navia ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: C needs a BOOST
    ... If, as Paul believes, there are awful things wrong with C++ standard containers, then it is important to avoid repeating those mistakes when extending C, and entirely on-topic to discuss what those mistakes were. ... I'd like to do some C++ programming professionally, but it seems not to be the language of choice in my chosen specialty, scientific computer programming. ... Fortranand C still seem to be the preferred languages in the places where I've looked. ...
    (comp.std.c)
  • Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns
    ... > C programming that deal with stuff of the genre of the example? ... I've already explained how to avoid it. ... If the C standard had tried to prevent every potential ... intended users, especially systems implementors. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: C (functional programming) VS C++ (object oriented programming)
    ... want a "safe" language, you can use one of them. ... leads to the death of C as a programming language. ... alternatives to many Standard C functions. ... jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: C++ Coding Standards
    ... In standard C is not possible to replace ... Avoid magic numbers. ... Always write internal #include guards. ...
    (comp.lang.c)