Re: VB vs. C++ vs. ???

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

(first execuse me for the douple post, I hit the false button ;), ups)

Hello Cor,

Cor Ligthert [MVP] wrote:

> Joerg,
>
>> I think that for instance C++ is much more strickter as a language (in means of typesafty) and you learn very much because there is no garbage collection (at least in std c++).
>
>
>
> That would be an argument to go for real machine language. However program languages are evolving.
>
> Because of the fact that the trend of your message is continuing the same I answer the rest in a more general opinion about that.
>
> In my idea is what you tell not based on OOP, however on limits of posibilities in creating more abstract use of OOP features in the languages C and C++.
>
> That makes it needed to do actions on a lower more concrete level.

[snip]


Hm, nop, I don't thing so because of the followong reasons:

It is true that it is not nessesary for a programmer to really know things like assembler, however, I thing it is important to get a good idear of what a computer does.

I think that C++ is, if used right, a good thing between the abstractions of OOP and the low level parts of mashine language. So you can learn bretty much, and I don't agree with you that you can't learn the basic principles of abstractions in OOP in C++, I think it is more a problem of the teaching.

However it is true that especially for the beginning people are very concened about there storage management in the programm. But you learn to handle that, and you learn bretty good the rules of scoping and livetime.

After a while you even don't need very much pointers in C++, mainly references and learn that also in C++ there is the possibility of automatic lifetime management. (In the last programms I did with my colleges there were nearly no news and pointer inside (1 or 2)).

However we used many of the OOD abstractiona and design patterns.

But that beeing said: It is true that with higher level languages you abstract the parts of livecircle management with reference counted objects, which helps you modelling.

However if you managed modelling with c++, and i insist of that it is possible to modell in a good way in C++ (the GoF has many C++ examples, Alexandrescus Modern C++ Design is an other good examples of the OO capatibilities of C++) it is quite easy to learn how to make your models in C# and VB.NET, the reverse is defenitely not true.

My opinion,
  Jörg Simon
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OO and Extending (Was: Is Procedural Paradigm a basis of OO Paradigm?)
    ... That greatly depends on the language. ... You have to *show* OOP being better, not merely claim you are smart ... I find at least two problems with OO's approach to "extension without ... It works for systems programming, ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: why still use C?
    ... >> learn and work with with the C language, ... > - some people don't want to learn OOP ... can be used with many other programming styles. ... >> have caused him to associate your nonfluency with English ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: A new paradigm
    ... OOP being described in OOP language instead of in English. ... Many of us in the MV environment are business people who know what we are ...
    (comp.databases.pick)
  • Re: Association vs Dependency
    ... >>the specific language. ... it is actually subverting the prerogatives of OOP. ... problems with physical coupling that procedural 3GLs. ... dependencies through the header file definitions. ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: OOP leads to lousy websites?
    ... > There has been a number of threads in this newsgroup concerning OOP ... OOP is really (in any language, although some give you no alternatives) just ... the actual programming is done with only a very small ... Imagine that there is *no* functions in PHP. ...
    (comp.lang.php)