C is too old? opinions?

[Lasse Espeholt]

Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i
thinks it is obsolete...

The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into
eachother i don't like... Look at C# which is much cleaner with
namespaces.

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

Something like:

a_source_file.c:

namespace SomeName(.SomeName)
{
area Stack
{
private int[] myStack;

private void someMethod() {};

public void push(int i) {};
public int pop() {};
}
}

another_source_file.c:

using SomeName(.SomeName);

int main(int argc, char[] *argv)
{
Stack.push(10);
System.printf(Stack.pop());
}

I'm really annoyed Is im the only own with that point of view?

If i was a really good programmer (which i'm not... yet! ) i would
developed a compiler and a much more simple (but still impressive and
powerfull) c...

Best and kindest regards
Lasse Espeholt

 

[Ben Pfaff]

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

It sounds like you can get what you want from C++.

 

[Lasse Espeholt]

It sounds like you can get what you want from C++.

There is still the header issue which i'm not a fan of... I can get rid
of header files but it is still recommended, right?

 

[Walter Roberson]

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

Please read about the "static" storage qualifier, and about "file scope".

 

[Ben Pfaff]

There is still the header issue which i'm not a fan of... I can get rid
of header files but it is still recommended, right?

I don't think there is a practical way to write large C or C++
programs without using header files. If you want to avoid header
files entirely, you'll need to move to something like C# or Java.

 

[Andrew Poelstra]

There is still the header issue which i'm not a fan of... I can get rid
of header files but it is still recommended, right?

I'm not sure what you mean by that. No, you shouldn't eliminate header
files. C++ has what you want with namespaces. What is "still recommended,
right"?

 

[Lasse Espeholt]

I'm not sure what you mean by that. No, you shouldn't eliminate header
files. C++ has what you want with namespaces. What is "still recommended,
right"?

I thought that header issen't nessesary in c++ but recommended, but i'm
not a c++ developer so...

I'm looking for the simplicity of c# without objects

 

[Andrew Poelstra]

Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i
thinks it is obsolete...

Nah; in fact, a new standard was released around 1999, and it still
isn't implemented widely because the features from 1989 are still
perfectly useful today!

The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into
eachother i don't like... Look at C# which is much cleaner with
namespaces.

C++ has namespaces. You could try over there.

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

If you qualify a function with `static', it isn't visible outside
of the file that it is defined in.

I'm really annoyed Is im the only own with that point of view?

Around here, probably.

If i was a really good programmer (which i'm not... yet! ) i would
developed a compiler and a much more simple (but still impressive and
powerfull) c...

There was a guy who did that... Bjarne Strousup, they called him.
(Although `they' knew how to spell his name properly.)

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Lasse Espeholt said:

Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i
thinks it is obsolete...

Fine, so don't use it. Nobody is forcing you to.

The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into
eachother i don't like...

Since C doesn't have methods, the problem doesn't arise.

Look at C# which is much cleaner with namespaces.

No thanks.

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

Because the language definition doesn't say it has.

If i was a really good programmer (which i'm not... yet! ) i would
developed a compiler and a much more simple (but still impressive and
powerfull) c...

Nobody is stopping you.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Lasse Espeholt said:

I'm looking for the simplicity of c# without objects

Then C is the wrong place to look. C has objects. So does C++, so it's no
good looking there, either.

 

[Lasse Espeholt]

I don't think there is a practical way to write large C or C++
programs without using header files. If you want to avoid header
files entirely, you'll need to move to something like C# or Java.

If C# can, C also can .... i can't see any problems ?

 

[Lasse Espeholt]

Nah; in fact, a new standard was released around 1999, and it still
isn't implemented widely because the features from 1989 are still
perfectly useful today!


C++ has namespaces. You could try over there.


If you qualify a function with `static', it isn't visible outside
of the file that it is defined in.


Around here, probably.


There was a guy who did that... Bjarne Strousup, they called him.
(Although `they' knew how to spell his name properly.)

yeah.... Bjarne Stroustrup is from my planet (Denmark, NOT the swedish
capital)

hhm... i'm sadly the only one whom does not like C structure very much

 

[Andrew Poelstra]

I thought that header issen't nessesary in c++ but recommended, but i'm
not a c++ developer so...

Headers aren't technically necessary in C, either... it's still a
terrible idea to try and get along without them.

 

[Andrew Poelstra]

If C# can, C also can .... i can't see any problems ?

Untrue. Think carefully about that statement, and consider why C and
C# are different languages.

 

[Lasse Espeholt]

Untrue. Think carefully about that statement, and consider why C and
C# are different languages.

I know why they are different, but in this case it is true

 

[Lasse Espeholt]

Lasse Espeholt said:



Then C is the wrong place to look. C has objects. So does C++, so it's
no good looking there, either.

Object-orientated, classes then....

 

[Lasse Espeholt]

Headers aren't technically necessary in C, either... it's still a
terrible idea to try and get along without them.

I think its workds great in other languages...?

 

[Lasse Espeholt]

Lasse Espeholt said:


Fine, so don't use it. Nobody is forcing you to.


Since C doesn't have methods, the problem doesn't arise.


No thanks.


Because the language definition doesn't say it has.



Nobody is stopping you.

nobody forcing me - no, but in some cases C is a wonderfull
language.... don't get me wrong... i don't hate the language... it is
infact one of my favourites but i think some things could be done
better... i think it has some things there issent nessesary in modern
languages... for example header files...

hhm... it is correct that nobody is stopping me, but i stops myself...
I'm not good enogh....

best regards

 

[Default User]

Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i
thinks it is obsolete...

What you think is largely irrelevant. C isn't going anywhere, and is
still the language of choice for many applications.

The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into
eachother i don't like... Look at C# which is much cleaner with
namespaces.

Gawd. If you must have that, C++ is a far better idea.



Brian

 

[Fred Kleinschmidt]

Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i thinks
it is obsolete...

The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into eachother i
don't like... Look at C# which is much cleaner with namespaces.

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and fields
could be hidden from the outside?

It does: static methods are hidden to the world outside the file in which
they are defined.