should i learn it first ?

[phil hunt]

On Sun, 10 Mar 2002 19:21:08 -0500, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne at acm.org> wrote:
>In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk (phil hunt) transmitted:
>> On 10 Mar 2002 10:15:06 -0800, Aahz Maruch <aahz at panix.com> wrote:
>>>In article <slrna8mogf.6ek.philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk>,
>>>phil hunt <philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>On Sat, 09 Mar 2002 22:57:42 -0500, Peter Hansen <peter at engcorp.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>I agree with much of what you say, especially the "consider skipping
>>>>>C++ and just learn C part", but _what_ pragmatic point of view is it
>>>>>that has one learning Perl, Java, or C++ when one uses Python already?
>>>>>Not dissing those languages, but when would you really need them?
>>>>
>>>>I can think of several tasks for which C++ is better than Python, 
>>>>e.g. writing operating systems, network stacks, windowing systems, 
>>>>run-time interpreters, crypto algorithms, etc.
>>>
>>>But are there any tasks for which C++ (or C++/Python) is really better
>>>than C/Python?
>>
>> Any task for whiich OO is useful, which means essentially all
>> programs >5000 lines (and most smaller ones), will benefit from C++
>> over C.
>
>Would that include the implementation of runtime code for an
>at-the-bare-iron OS kernel to support:
> a) vtables, and
> b) memory management?
>
>Remember, when you're sitting at that level, you have no runtime
>support code, and so can make no use of:
> - Virtual functions
> - Constructors
> - Destructors
>
>I would tend to think that figuring out the usable subset of C++ would
>become painful enough to discourage its use.

Good point.



-- 
<"><"><"> Philip Hunt <philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk> <"><"><">
"I would guess that he really believes whatever is politically 
advantageous for him to believe." 
                        -- Alison Brooks, referring to Michael
                              Portillo, on soc.history.what-if