Is C++ Dying? - Page 3

[Nick Evan]

I currently use an IDE which was made in Java to program C++ :)

[jbennet]

LOLOLOLOL
Not to say C++ isn't used any longer, for it is, but it's certainly no longer the first choice for many of the largest corporate and government entities when creating new systems (especially middleware and backend systems).

Different markets. Java was designed for middleware. C++ was designed as a general purpouse systems programming language.

[mb01a]

As long as I have C++ installed on my workstation, it will not die ..

[WaltP]

As long as I have C++ installed on my workstation, it will not die ..

Ahh, then BASIC is safe, too. I have it installed on my computer...

[jwenting]

Different markets. Java was designed for middleware. C++ was designed as a general purpouse systems programming language.

Not really. Both were designed as general purpose languages.
In fact the original idea behind Java was for a language that would allow true platform independent GUI development for anything from PCs to handheld devices as well being able to be used on smartcards, mainframes, and in your fridge and car.

If it became most popular in the serverside market for internet, intranet, and extranet distributed corporate systems, a market not originally envisioned at all (the J2EE spec didn't appear until 2 years after Java 1.0) that just shows how unpredictable the world is as well as how flexible Java turned out to be.

The same effectively happened with C++, which was envisioned as a language for programming scientific and business applications on minis using dumb terminals for screens as well as system software for those minis.
It wasn't until much later that it became widely adopted for desktop applications.

[markmatt]

i think now days c++ are rarely used..but it is a good programming language.

[jwenting]

i think now days c++ are rarely used..but it is a good programming language.

and you'd be dead wrong about it being rarely used.
It may be used rarely by ignorant schoolkids, but that's IMO a good thing for a language (the frequent use by such kids is one of the main reasons there's so much crap in the Java community for example).

[skatamatic]

From what I remember C++ was a good time. But C# blows it out of the water if you like getting your work done in time for beers and the hockey game.

[Ancient Dragon]

From what I remember C++ was a good time. But C# blows it out of the water if you like getting your work done in time for beers and the hockey game.

That may be true where .NET framework is available, but there are only a few operating systems that have it available. It will take decades for C# to achieve the portability that C++ has.

[jwenting]

It will take decades for C# to achieve the portability that C++ has.

optimistic today?

[mb01a]

C# is designed for the college crowd so they can learn enough about programming to be able to move up to C++ ..

[jwenting]

C# is designed for the college crowd so they can learn enough about programming to be able to move up to C++ ..

wrong, it was designed for corporate developers so they can produce applications more quickly than using C++ that outperform those written in VB (which also has a very bad reputation among professionals so many won't touch it with a 10ft pole).

[Nick Evan]

C# is designed for the college crowd so they can learn enough about programming to be able to move up to C++ ..

:icon_wink:

[webdesignuk]

Absolutely u r correct.. bcz up coming new technologies.
Like JAVA.....u know java inherited most advance technologies.

[mb01a]

A good C++ programmer keeps a set of reusable functions in his 'common' folder so he can make a new program by just copying a few of them into the new project, write 6 lines of code to tie everything together, compile and execute.

And I have yet to find something any flavor of C can do that can't be done in VB (including performance). Can a user tell the difference between 10 and 15 nanoseconds?

*grin*

[skatamatic]

Can a user tell the difference between 10 and 15 nanoseconds?

*grin*

Probably not, but repeat the code a million times and that 50% performance difference will certainly start to be noticeable.

In VB (.Net I am assuming) - use a pointer. At all. Just use one. Oh snap you can't.

[BitBlt]

In VB (.Net I am assuming) - use a pointer. At all. Just use one. Oh snap you can't.

Um...actually you can. It isn't pretty but read this.

Besides, why would I want to use pointers in VB? Didn't Microsoft (hallowed be it's name) specifically build VB so I wouldn't have to worry my pretty little head about hard stuff like that? :icon_cheesygrin:
</sarcasm>

[skatamatic]

Um...actually you can. It isn't pretty but read this.

Besides, why would I want to use pointers in VB? Didn't Microsoft (hallowed be it's name) specifically build VB so I wouldn't have to worry my pretty little head about hard stuff like that? :icon_cheesygrin:
</sarcasm>

That's cheating. That's calling a C++ written API that uses pointers.

[jbennet]

in C# you can use the "unsafe" keyword?

[murnesty]

Im still using c programming :D for the embedded system

[cwarn23]

Im still using c programming :D for the embedded system

Yer, well while you's are learning the different variations of C I have been skimming the manuals of Assembly. Assembly is a very lengthy language but good code is lengthy unlike other languages such as c#, ruby, java, visual basic, coke etc. Yes the drink has its own language. But of course Assembly is only effective on Linux. If you want effective code on windows you should use C or Fortran or Basic (not Visual Basic).

[skatamatic]

Yer, well while you's are learning the different variations of C I have been skimming the manuals of Assembly. Assembly is a very lengthy language but good code is lengthy unlike other languages such as c#, ruby, java, visual basic, coke etc. Yes the drink has its own language. But of course Assembly is only effective on Linux. If you want effective code on windows you should use C or Fortran or Basic (not Visual Basic).

How is assembly only effective on Linux? That makes no sense at all.

[Narue]

How is assembly only effective on Linux? That makes no sense at all.

It's obviously a joke. :icon_rolleyes:

[cwarn23]

It's obviously a joke. :icon_rolleyes:

No, Assembly is only effective on linux because in Windows, Assembly is normally compiled in high/medium level languages such as C which are then written in the low level language of Assembly which then brings the following family tree.\

Punch cards
to
Assembly
to
BCPL/Bon
to
B
to
C
to
Assembly & C++
           from C++ to Assembly again

As you can see there is a wide variety of ways Assembly can be written but there is only one true way and that is via Punch cards. And unfortunately Assembly on windows is not written in punch cards but rather in C and/or C++. However Assembly on Linux/Unix is written in Punch cards dating back to the days of the origin of Unix. Believe it or not Windows origin is Basic. Not Visual Basic but just plain Basic which is another medium/high level language there by slowing down performance unlike Linux which has Assembly and C. So because Unix was originally written in the low level language Assembly which was designed by punch cards along with its preprocessor C, that is what makes Linux & Unix the only operating systems capable of executing Assembly code effectively.

[TheNNS]

I thought windows was written in c though, not basic.

[cwarn23]

I thought windows was written in c though, not basic.

Well I know for a fact Windows 98 SE and all previous versions including dos were written in Basic.

[MosaicFuneral]

Punch cards and assembly, what's that - some new fangled wizardry?

01010101
10001001 11100101
00110011 11000000
11001001
11000011

[cwarn23]

Punch cards and assembly, what's that - some new fangled wizardry?

01010101
10001001 11100101
00110011 11000000
11001001
11000011

Assembly was one of the founders of what we today know as programming as it made programming a lot easier by typing in syntax. Before assembly it was all done digitally with no strings and no text. I think before Assembly there might have been a language where you could type just hexadecimals with something like 16 digits to a row and the computer would translate that to binary which would then be executed. The syntax as I recall from a book many years ago was as follows:

AC345FE5902FACB0
93674A38433229AC
BEFD3209835DEA1B
3C537A98F586B4BE

Now that is traditional programming before Assembly. The syntax may vary as there may be spaces and other new lines but it was all hexadecimal. But before you could even type your code into a computer it was one persons job to just sit at a desk and punch holes into paper to indicate ones and zeros and the paper would be fed into a computer. Then the computer would read where the holes are in the paper and write your program based on that. But all of todays code is based on layers ontop of layers which the source lead to one man who in the 1980's punched holes in paper. That's right. Even Windows, Linux, Mac. They all have been based on punch cards and over time instead of reinventing new ways to type ones and zeros into a computer, we simply told the computer use the ones and zeros that this guy typed to generate more ones and zeros for this new compiler. Then that new compiler would eventually be told to generate more ones and zeros more to generate another compiler and in each process it adds another layer of complexity to the interpretation to find out what the first compiler had written. So the less compilers that have written the code the faster the execution time and the faster the execution time the less cpu you will use. Personally I think C needs a rewrite in punch cards.

[Ancient Dragon]

>>Assembly was one of the founders of what we today know as programming

Wrong. According to this wiki article programming originated in ancient Greece over 1,200 years ago, although I think China may have developed it earlier then that.

[cwarn23]

>>Assembly was one of the founders of what we today know as programming

Wrong. According to this wiki article programming originated in ancient Greece over 1,200 years ago, although I think China may have developed it earlier then that.

However the Greeks did not use interpreters to run binary processors with a data flow of electrons did they now? Also notice the part where I said "what we today know as programming". So the earliest system which can be referred to by these specifications is punch cards and before that does not fall into the category unless you can think of any other methods of programming that in simple would fall in to all of the below categories.

• Is digital
• Can be fed through a Central Processor Unit of some sort
• Can perform basic math operations

Unless it falls into those categories it simply isn't a founder of programming that we still use today in our every day code. For example, we still use punch card code in our every day life as all high level languages are written in low level languages which are written in punch cards. :)