c/c++ required?

S

Sudsy

Frank said:
I just said I like C++ more than Java. I didn't say Java was crap. I
like Java, too. And I gave reasons for my opinion. Did I do something
wrong?

But why complain that Java doesn't have something that C++ does?
Would you prefer that Java have operator overloading? Would it
make life somehow better for the majority of Java programmers?
A language is what it is. Lamenting that it doesn't have this or
that feature (which is available in language Y) just seems a tad
unproductive.
 
L

Loco Pollo

i think we're already in agreement. i was replying to a message about
efficient code for things like apps. i don't put that in the same
category as knowing sql. no doubt that you need to know everything
your sql statement will end up doing. "whats important is your
understanding of sql and making your code easy to read and modify."
and i never went to the old "microsoft throw more hardware to it". my
assertion is that the fastest most efficient code for front end apps
is irrelevant. i'll take easier to read and modify over that any
day(to a degree of course).
 
S

Sudsy

Loco said:
i think we're already in agreement. i was replying to a message about
efficient code for things like apps. i don't put that in the same
category as knowing sql. no doubt that you need to know everything
your sql statement will end up doing. "whats important is your
understanding of sql and making your code easy to read and modify."
and i never went to the old "microsoft throw more hardware to it". my
assertion is that the fastest most efficient code for front end apps
is irrelevant. i'll take easier to read and modify over that any
day(to a degree of course).

In my experience, the fastest, most efficient code is frequently
also the easiest to read.
But the original question was whether learning C/C++ was a prereq
for learning Java. My concern was that people versed in those
languages (particularly C++) might actually find it more difficult
to learn Java. Too much baggage, too many complaints about how
Java doesn't have this and can't do that...
If you learn it from scratch then you don't have to concern
yourself with such issues. But then we get programmers migrating
from VB who bemoan the lack of a drag-and-drop workspace...
<sigh/>
 
T

Timo Kinnunen

Sudsy said:
But why complain that Java doesn't have something that C++ does?
Would you prefer that Java have operator overloading?

I would, if it were done well.
Would it
make life somehow better for the majority of Java programmers?

Probably not, but then again, javax.naming.* is totally useless to
me, too.
A language is what it is.

It is now, but languages evolve.
 
L

Larry Coon

Frank said:
I still like C++ more than Java, because Java is not as mature as C++
yet. Java is somewhat limited in its syntax (e.g. operators cannot be
overloaded).

The other responses notwithstanding, your statement here misses
an important point. You're assuming that missing features such
as operator overloading are due to the language lacking maturity,
and that it's somewhere along the path to someday having them.

Certain features, such as operator overloading and MI, were
intentionally omitted from Java. It's not a lack of maturity,
it's a conscious decision not to do it. Your point is akin to
saying that C++ is not as mature as Java because it doesn't have
automatic garbage collection yet. The reality is that they are
different beasts serving the software development process in
different ways.
 
R

Roedy Green

Yes. On this newsgroup some people don't make you welcome unless you say C++
is crap.

That is not true. What will get you in trouble is saying Java is
crap, (especially if you are not specific about what feature you think
is crap).

What will also get you in trouble is REPEATEDLY making untrue
statements about the relative merits of C++ and Java.

You HAVE to use C++ for any platform-specific code. You really have
no other choice. Even if you wanted to do your platform-specific
stuff in ADA you would need some horrendous JNI/C++/ADA glue.

The more languages one learns the less attached one usually is to any
one of them. The people most opposed to Java have not yet learned to
code it. The people who want to talk most about Java/C++ comparison
have not yet learned both. Every language is difficult at first if
you are used to something else. That is a fact about you, not about
the two languages.
 
L

Loco Pollo

In my experience, the fastest, most efficient code is frequently
also the easiest to read.

in my experience it is usually the case but not always. my perspective
is that easier to read AND MODIFY(not just for you but others) is more
important than counting every step. but of course the operative phrase
is "Depends on what your doin."
But the original question was whether learning C/C++ was a prereq
for learning Java. My concern was that people versed in those
languages (particularly C++) might actually find it more difficult
to learn Java. Too much baggage, too many complaints about how
Java doesn't have this and can't do that...
If you learn it from scratch then you don't have to concern
yourself with such issues. But then we get programmers migrating
from VB who bemoan the lack of a drag-and-drop workspace...
<sigh/>

as i see it java was created by C++ programmers who bemoaned all the
unnecessary things they had to deal with. VB was created by a dude who
sat back and said: "it can all be sooooo much easier" (not real
quote). in a balance between writing great code vs fast code, i think
VB is on the far end of the fast code. of course we're gonna complain
bout not bein able to do certain things faster. hope you guys will
forgive my infrequent lamentations. :}~
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,484
Members
44,904
Latest member
HealthyVisionsCBDPrice

Latest Threads

Top