Richard Heathfield posted:
Some of them are pretty bright, you know - and some are even C experts
who happen not to like the language as much as they like C++. (Weird,
I know, but then there's nowt as queer as folk.)
I know my way inside out through the C subset of C++. I can do everything
I want to do in C, but I haven't got its Standard memorised as much as
the C++ Standard. For instance, yesterday I was hesitant to state the
following:
int array[5] = { 3, 4 };
/* First two elements are 3, 4, and all others are zero */
I know without a shadow of a doubt that this is true for C++, but didn't
want to post misinformation just in case I was wrong about C.
Even though I'm an expert C++ programmer, and know its every fancy
feature inside out, I'm still an expert at the lower-level stuff which
are held in common with C.
(Before I say anything: I'm not waving the C++ flag on a C newsgroup, but
since the topic's been brought up
I myself prefer C++. That said, a
lot of my C++ code will compile as C code (i.e. I like to keep things
basic), but there are times when the more fancy features are definitely
preferable. Even when I'm writing C code, I can find plenty of places
where I'd like to use a template, but can't.
The reason I read and post on this C newsgroup is that there's a lot more
posts about the "lower-level" stuff, than you would find on a C++
newsgroup. In general, I prefer the lower-level stuff to the higher-level
stuff.
-Tomás